Talk:Philipp, Prince of Eulenburg

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance).

Germany B‑class Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies: Person

	LGBTQ portal This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
	This article is supported by the LGBTQ+ Person task force.

Children and descendants

His younger children only had the title "Graf zu Eulenburg" (not Prinz, and not und Hertefeld, and not Graf von Sandels). I have removed the information about grandchildren and other descendants; this is not usual in Wikipedia articles. Noel S McFerran (talk) 03:07, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This title is horrible

Nobody ever calls him "The Prince of Eulenburg". And why are we anglicizing his given name? I'm not sure what the best title would be (maybe "Prince Philipp of Eulenburg"?), but this certainly isn't it. We don't have "Otto, Prince of Bismarck." john k (talk) 18:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a mess. Particularly changing Philipp to Philip, which no other encyclopaedia recognises. And as Wikipedia's own naming conventions state: "If an examination of the sources in an article shows that one name or version of the name stands out as clearly the most commonly used in the English language, we should follow the sources and use it." See the outcome of the discussion on German naming here. [1] I've added the additional 'p' to his Christian name (as per the body of the article), but retained 'zu' as 'of' in the first instance, while providing the titles as German in the first mention, which is also common on Wikipedia. Some add a rollover note to explain Graf. Engleham (talk) 17:43, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article length

Re your tags, I suggest that the lede is adequate, and the article is much too long, right out of proportion to the notability of the subject. Valetude (talk) 00:33, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Philipp, Prince of Eulenburg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070625120816/http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/eulenburg_hertefeld.html to http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/eulenburg_hertefeld.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:28, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]