Jump to content

Talk:Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articlePrince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 20, 2024Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 9, 2024.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Prince Philip (pictured) was the first member of the British royal family to fly in a helicopter?


Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 14:58, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Portrait of Philip, 1992
Portrait of Philip, 1992
  • ... that Prince Philip (pictured) was the first member of the British royal family to fly in a helicopter? Source: [1]
    • Reviewed:
Improved to Good Article status by MSincccc (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

MSincccc (talk) 18:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article qualifies via recently achieving Good Article status. SFNs don't work on this page, but I was able to confirm the hook through the cite in the article itself. Obviously, as a GA about a major figure, it is long enough, well-sourced, and quite presentable. No QPQ is needed—you did this before getting 5 DYKs? Well done. Hook itself is pretty interesting; only suggestion I would give before confirming is specifying British royal family, as many readers would think of other royal families upon seeing the phrase. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 17:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The hook is represented on Page 259 of the source. It is essentially WP:ABOUTSELF since someone is asking him if he was first and he answers "yes". I do not think it is controversial. We have another problem however, the article has recently appeared as a bold link in the news. Unfortunately we may have to reject this nomination because of that. Bruxton (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NEW says it must not have appeared in the last year, and that link was 2021. This is fine.--Launchballer 08:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Brandreth 2004, p. 259


Requested move 15 June 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Closed early as the outcome is obvious. (non-admin closure) Celia Homeford (talk) 13:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

– To all British Wikipedians celebrating, happy King's Official Birthday! In the spirit of this event, per WP:CRITERIA, WP:CONSUB, and WP:CONSORTS, I am requesting that these article titles on the father of the reigning Charles III and husband of Elizabeth II be changed. All editors are encouraged to read the extended rationale before commenting. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 07:50, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended rationale

[edit]
  1. WP:RECOGNIZABILITY: A - When analyzing results from 1900 to 2019 via Google Books Ngram Viewer, it can be seen that Philip Mountbatten is more commonly used (i.e. WP:COMMONNAME) than Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh in sources for the majority of this timespan. Therefore, someone who is familiar with … the subject area of Elizabeth II’s consort is more likely to recognize the title Philip Mountbatten.
  2. WP:NATURALNESS: The English Wikipedia articles for Philip’s wedding and the associated cakes are (already) titled Wedding of Princess Elizabeth and Philip Mountbatten and Princess Elizabeth and Philip Mountbatten’s wedding cakes, respectively. Consequently, editors would naturally use [Philip Mountbatten] to link the article from other articles.
  3. WP:PRECISION: Since January 22, 2003, Philip Mountbatten has been a redirect to Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. In addition, no other English Wikipedia article is titled Philip Mountbatten as of June 15, 2024. Therefore, the proposed alternative (still) unambiguously identifies the article’s subject and distinguishes it from other subjects.
  4. WP:CONCISION: Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh contains 32 characters and 5 words. In contrast, Philip Mountbatten only contains 18 characters and 2 words. (Counts obtained via WordCounter.net) Also, per WP:CONCISION, ...family names are usually not omitted … for the purposes of concision. Philip adopted the family name Mountbatten shortly before marrying Elizabeth because of his descent from the eponymous noble family.
  5. WP:CONSORTS: One of the bullet points within this guideline mentions that Consorts who are native subjects of their spouses are often known by their maiden name … as with Catherine Parr …. Philip was a British subject prior to his marriage to Elizabeth II.
  6. WP:CONSISTENT: When analyzing the article titles for other deceased spouses of British monarchs, all part of a ...similar [topic]... as Philip, it can be seen that most of them refer to their subjects (no pun intended) with a name that they used before marrying into British royalty:

AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 07:50, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
Oppose: As per previous responses, Phillip is far more known as the Duke of Edinburgh. The suggested one is not nearly as common or recogniseable. TheBritinator (talk) 11:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2024

[edit]

this man died one month before his 100th birthday 2600:1005:B01C:E95F:EDA2:1DAC:B597:DF1E (talk) 19:40, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done This template should be used to request explicit changes, i.e. Please change X to Y. It is not supposed to be used to make incorrect assertions. DrKay (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

[edit]

I don't know if this has already been discussed, but would a name change to "Philip Mountbatten" or "Prince Philip Mountbatten" be appropriate now he is deceased? I saw a similar discussion regarding The Queen Monther which ended up against the move as "The Queen Monther" was a common name because that title has not been reallocated. However this doesn't apply here as Prince Edward is now Duke of Edinburgh. Mn1548 (talk) 15:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suspect that "Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh", or either of those names separately, were the common names, and that "Philip Mountbatten" or "Prince Philip Mountbatten" certainly weren't. Now we have Prince Edward, Duke of Edinburgh, so there might be some room for confusion.
Of the previous holders, Frederick became Prince of Wales (and his son became George III, when the title was merged) and Alfred became Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (and his son Alfred, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha committed suicide, so the Dukedom became extinct). Martinevans123 (talk) 17:12, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Prince_Philip,_Duke_of_Edinburgh&oldid=1248596375"