Talk:The Young Victoria

The Young Victoria has been listed as one of the Media and drama 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
Date	Process	Result
September 10, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Film: British / Canadian / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Canadian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Martin Scorcese

Why is there a list of films directed by Martin Scorcese at the bottom of the page? Of what relevance is that? Scorcese only produced this film - it was directed by Jean-Marc Valée. I submit that the table be removed from this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Briantw (talk • contribs) 16:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Brian, and I want this film to be released in the States! It sounds amazing. jengod (talk) 06:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it should be on the table? 76.66.197.17 (talk) 07:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Historical Accuracy"

For the record, it is complete nonsense to pretend that it is historically inaccurate to depict people in the nineteenth century calling Victoria "Queen of England," referring to the UK as "England," and to its inhabitants as "English." This is what people did in the nineteenth century. People frequentl still do it today, and nowadays Scottish and Welsh people get really pissed off about it. In the nineteenth century, there was much less of that, and what there was most English people didn't care about. It was completely standard to call Victoria "Queen of England" and that's exactly what people did call her. So please don't add the paragraph that I removed back in. john k (talk) 05:52, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"passionate Tory"

I'm really not certain what the "passionate Tory" line has to do with the accuracy of the incidents mentioned imediately after, which the writer claims are accurate, in some places being word-for-word. This is not a critique of the writer's screenplay as such, nor his bio article. The article cited is primarily about his "passionate support for the Conservative Party, proved a stumbling block to his early acting career", not about any connection of his beliefs to the script in any way, and as such is grossly misleading, and synthesis, if not outright OR in context,

However, the point must be made that Scorsese is a US Democrat, and a well-known figue of the liberal-left political persausion, among whose controversial works is "The Last Temptation of Jesus Christ". One must assume,a s a producer, he was aware of the writer's political leanings, and yet was still involved with the project. I'm not trying to make a "point to be disruptive" here, but either both party affiliations should be mentioned, or both be removed. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 13:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At least two other editors have removed the "passionate Tory" comments, so with a lack of dicsussion by the opposing parties, the consesnus seems to be for leaving hte comments out. Thanks for repsectin ghte concus, though if you still disagree, please state your case here, and try to sway the consensus. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 21:47, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment the start of the article reads very oddly. A weasel word tag and mentioning that scorsese is a democrat, and that's it. It doesn't make sense: cleaning it.1812ahill (talk) 11:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought the IP editor had renmoved those - they are only needed if "passionate Tory" is retained. - BilCat (talk) 12:23, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To-do list

To-do: Find source for "In real life she did not meet him until after she became Queen, so King William had no hand in their meeting."

-Ruby2010 comment! 20:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Young Victoria/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Aranea Mortem (talk • contribs • count) 15:55, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this up, it's looking pretty good, and I'll probably pass it with some improvs.

Could you remove the "of the United Kingdom" from Queen Victoria (first sentence)? It seems a little superfluous.

Done Ruby comment! 16:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BAFTA Award for Best Costume Design and BAFTA Award for Best Makeup and Hair need links on the last sentence of the lede.

Done Ruby comment! 16:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Victoria moves into the just-completed Buckingham Palace" Victoria moves into a recently constructed/completed Buckingham Palace?

Done Ruby comment! 16:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"They also supported arts and sciences which was celebrated" I could be wrong, but is isn't it "that were celebrated"?

Done Ruby comment! 16:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"an historian" A his...

Done Ruby comment! 16:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The producer later remembered, "She..." Lower case the s.

Done Ruby comment! 16:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Put a {{Track listing}} on the Music section, with the lengths of the tracks and such.
Expand out the accolades from your article List of accolades received by The Young Victoria, just a couple more awards need be mentioned.
The Home media section needs a bit of expansion, are there not any sources to be found to improve it?
You should probs remove the Films about and TV about section from See also.
There are 2 dablinks need fixing: AMC and The Blind Side. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 16:12, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! I'll keep working on the others. Ruby comment! 16:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All of the rest of your great suggestions have now been implemented. Thanks again for the review! Kind regards, Ruby comment! 18:29, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, good work, all passed! Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 13:44, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Filming

The article states, "Due to The Duchess of York's status and connections with the British royal family, The Young Victoria was able to film in many actual palaces and other landmarks." I think this assertion needs to be examined.

In fact, the film is notable for the complete absence of "actual palaces", e.g the exteriors of the newly-completed Buckingham Palace - one of the better-known buildings in the entire country - were clearly identifiable as having been shot at another well-known national landmark, Blenheim Palace. If there were any lingering doubts, several of the wide shots clearly showed Blenheim's highly-distinctive towers^[1]. The article specifies that scenes were shot in Arundel Castle (which I presume served as a stand-in for the Round Tower in the Windsor Castle scene), but it also claims that Hampton Court (a royal palace)^[2] was used, yet the credit list thanked owners for allowing filming in a number of National Trust, etc. properties but there was not a single acknowledgement for the use of any royal residence, garden or park.

It is also stated that the coronation in Westminster Abbey was shot in Lincoln Cathedral. It may be noted that the producers of another recent film - Stone of Destiny - who did not have Sarah Ferguson's "royal connections" were permitted to film inside the Abbey^[3].

GJLaw 62.56.55.149 (talk) 17:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on The Young Victoria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:04, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Young Victoria. 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/20100311184059/http://www.goldenglobes.org:80/nominations/year/2009/ to http://www.goldenglobes.org/nominations/year/2009/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 18:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Young Victoria. 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:

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) 21:43, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on The Young Victoria. 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:

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) 11:02, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused reviews

The article contained an unexplained comment block of unused reviews. I've removed them from the article and placed them here in case anyone might want to add them to the article later...

Caplan, Nina (5–11 March 2009). "The Young Victoria (2009)". Time Out London. Retrieved 30 December 2011.
Rainer, Peter (17 December 2009). "The Young Victoria: movie review". Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 30 December 2011.
Burr, Ty (25 December 2009). "Movie Review: The Young Victoria". The Boston Herald. Retrieved 30 December 2011.
Lanthier, Joseph Jon (15 December 2009). "The Young Victoria Film Review". Slant Magazine. Retrieved 30 December 2011.
Phipps, Keith (17 December 2009). "The Young Victoria". The Daily Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group. Retrieved 30 December 2011.

... but I doubt it, since the article has a good amount of reviews already. Also the last review seems to have been damaged at some point and is a strange mix of an AV Club review and a review from the Telegraph. The article already includes one review from the Telegraph by Chloe Fox, so the second Telegraph reference might have meant to be the review by Tim Robey. -- 109.79.69.130 (talk) 11:57, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.blenheimpalace.com/thepalace/palace-image-library.html

[2] ttp://www.hrp.org.uk/aboutus/whoweare/

[3] ttp://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/oct/14/heritage-scotland

[1]

[2]

[3]