Talk:Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility work group. | ||
Contents |
[edit] New
[edit] Vote (combination of two move proposals)
Vote for as many options you like, by approval voting. If voting for option #3: please indicate what you mean by "Other"; and don't add any more options, unless the ones you name with your vote in option 3 (e.g. "keep as is or move to XXX or to YYY")
Longer comments can be added below in #New 2 - comments from second vote on
Please add votes with "#" + (optional comment) + ~~~~
[edit] Option 1: Move to Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg
- I see no reason to include a second title. The article is unclear (at least to me), but it also seems to be a courtesy title, given on the grounds of a marroage now dissolved. Septentrionalis 16:30, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Option 2: Move to Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg
- support --Francis Schonken 20:35, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
- Support Deb 21:37, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
- Support Prsgoddess187 22:37, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
- Support It fits with other naming conventions, the current title is just bizare. (Alphaboi867 18:25, 22 September 2005 (UTC))
- Support definately to Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. Mac Domhnaill 02:36, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- support Why does Arrigo always move these articles. Arrigo please stop your crusade of renaming royal articles without placing a discussion first. Gryffindor
23:39, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Option 3: Other
[edit] Vote count report
Seven people voted, of which six for move to Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, summary:
- 6 out of 7 voters voted for Option 2 = 86% > 60%, conclusion: Move to Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg
The move had already been operated by Deb on 27/9/2005.
However, the cleanup after the move was not completed yet, so I:
- Clean up double redirects;
- Remove "move" templates here, and the listings on WP:RM (trying to help out with the backlog there).
--Francis Schonken 06:17, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, Francis, I've had technical problems and I was distracted. Deb 17:13, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Previous
[edit] Move?
Shouldn't this be at Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg? WP Naming conventions take out middle names in the title. (Written apparently by User:Matjlav)
- Why was the name of this page changed from Princess of Denmark to Countess of Frederiksborg? She is still titled Princess of Denmark, and will only be "demoted" (for lack of a better term) to Countess upon any future remarriage.Prsgoddess187 14:00, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose the requested move to Alexandra Christina, Princess of Denmark, Countess of Frederiksborg as that sort of long and repetitive titulary is clearly unencyclopedic in heading. Naming conventions instead say that if a non-reigning royal has a substantive title (such as Countess of Frederiksborg in this case), that is to be used as heading. Same as with Charles, Prince of Wales. Naming conventions are written also to prevent too long-winded royal romantics in headings here (which has been a familiar problem to those who wrote NCs, as here certainly are users who appear to be royal-romantics rather than objective encyclopedia-writers), as such will only make this encyclopedia seem ridiculous. Arrigo 08:42, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
- Approve renaming to Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. Acceptable per NC. Arrigo 09:53, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[1]
- Well if her title is too long, she should be under Alexandra Christina, Princess of Denmark as that is the title that the Danish family's website gives her [2]. If they still title her as a Princess of Denmark, shouldn't we?Prsgoddess187 12:31, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- I would agree with Prsgoddess187 that in this case we should simply use the official name the website of the Danish monarchy gives her. I see no point in further arguments in that case, because they obviously must know best... Gryffindor 20:39, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
- I would agree with Prsgoddess187 that in this case we should simply use the official name the website of the Danish monarchy gives her. I see no point in further arguments in that case, because they obviously must know best... Gryffindor
Comment: Princess of Denmark is not a substantive title, as is not either Prince of the United Kingdom. Charles is under his substantive title, Prince of Wales. And Charles's little brother Edward is under HIS substantive title Earl of Wessex and not under "Edward, Prince of the United Kingdom". The naming convention here in Wikipedia is to use substantive title and not a long bunch of titles. If someone is dissatisfied to the naming convention, go propose a change of that WP policy, do not try to create here a single case of some longer titulary. 217.140.193.123 13:53, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[1]
Maybe we can agree on a compromise. As was done with The Countess of Wessex, entered at Sophie, Countess of Wessex, would it be possible to move Alexandra to Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. As Sophie's name is not in her title, neither will Alexandra's be if she ever remarries, she will be Her Excellency The Countess of Frederiksborg. I am just trying to make the entry look better, and the search for it easier for those not so familiar with the WP naming conventions.Prsgoddess187 14:41, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
I agree to naming her as Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. (I always prefer entries where a personal name is the first word, instead of any title.) The move request should be changed accordingly, if any move is to become true. 217.140.193.123 14:59, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[1]
Ummmmm. no. You are all wrong this page was correctly located at Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. This is what is correct. What it is located at now is even more incorrect than Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. This is the style of the divorcee of the Count of Frederiksborg. Which she is not. It is incorrect to have this article titled anything except for Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. What you have done is the equivalent of listing Prince Philip at Duke Philip of Edinburgh.Mac Domhnaill 22:22, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
Mac Domhnaill - I don't disagree with you. I have no problem with the move back to Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, as that is her correct title. I was just trying to keep the peace, and avoid another cheesy edit war. I don't agree with where most of the British Royal Family are located, so I think that we think the same. I originally suggested Alexandra (Christina), Princess of Denmark, Countess of Frederiksborg, as that is her title on the Danish Royal Family's website, but your suggestion is a shorter version of that.Prsgoddess187 22:34, 18 September 2005 (UTC) Sorry for the length, I am really passionate about some strange things)
- It seems to me like most people want this page at Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg and the destination of the "requested move" above makes no sense in this context. Can we therefore vote on the new proposal, please? Deb 17:37, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Note
- ↑ a b c user Arrigo = user 217.140.193.123 - and collecting material for writing another episode of wikipedia:lamest edit wars ever and/or BJAODN, which he does regularly under both names. --Francis Schonken 09:51, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] New 2 - comments from second vote on
[edit] Move to Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg
Please enter whether you approve, oppose or are neutral to the above move. Please remember to sign your posts.
- Hope I did wel to start a new combined vote above? It wasn't clear to me who had approved to what with the two templates hovering over the old vote. --Francis Schonken 20:35, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- That's cool. I had started this section this afternoon after Deb suggested voting on the new choice, but your way is much easier. Prsgoddess187 22:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Comments can be added here
- Move, definately to Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. Mac Domhnaill 02:36, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Mac, this is the "further comments" section, best to add your vote to the appropriate vote section under the #New section title on top of the page if you want it to be counted, thanks! --Francis Schonken 10:54, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] , countess
The official website for The Danish Monarchy spells Princess Alexandra's additonal personal title without the "c" in "countess" being capitalized . (Respectively without the "g" in "grevinde" being capitalized in the Danish version). Hence the wikipedia article Princess Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg should be edited accordingly; Princess Alexandra, countess of Frederiksborg Vupti 15:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Based on the above I do not agree with the edit by 200.89.248.22 of the c into a capital C again in Countess.
- Should Princess Alexandra remarry and she ceases to be Princess, then I do believe the Danish Royal Court will write Countess with a capital C. However, I do not agree with the edited assumption that she will become HE The Countess. I rather believe the court write HE Countess Alexandra of Fredriksborg, like the former HH Princes of Denmark have been respectively HE Count Flemming of Rosenborg, HE Count Ingolf of Rosenborg and HE Count Christian of Rosenborg. Vupti 02:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- It would only make sense to write "countess" if her original title is written uncapitalized where such a title normally would be capitalized. Now, my guess is that "grevinde" is usually written that way. I might be wrong, but if the capitalization rules should be different in this specific case I'm quite certain that the press release would have explicitely said so. And if she's a "grevinde" in the ordinary way, she should be a "Countess" in the ordinary way: that is, capitalized. I don't think the "countess" on the DRC website (which I could only find in one place in the site, and so could very well be a mistype, a mistranslation, or an oversight) is to be taken as a desire that "grevinde" be translated in a specific way in this case, because, once again, the Court would have said so. (And even if it did, we would probably not let it govern the usage of English in the English Wikipedia, considering that we don't let the governments of the Czech Republic (wanting its country to be called "Czechia" in English) and East Timor (wanting its country to be called "Timor-Leste" in English) do the same.) Well, the easy way out is of course to ask the Royal Court what they mean. I might do that. -- Jao 11:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Titles
Knights of the Elephant are members of the 1st rank class. This means that during the short period from her knighting to the wedding (a couple of days I think), she was offically Hendes Excellence frøken Alexandra Manley. --Klausok 08:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The woman's official name
The Danish court calls her, officially, Alexandra Christina ... is there any reason Wiki does not, either in the title of the article or in the list of titles/names she has held from birth?Mowens35 20:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, because WP Naming Conventions rule #8 call for its omission in the page name. It's length would also probably clutter a styles box, but I agree that it should be mentioned in the first paragraph or soon thereafter. Lethiere 06:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
