Template talk:British princesses

Names

I have given these princesses their married names. That they all have British titles is noted by their inclusion on this template. Charles 05:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes

Victoria, Queen of the United Kingdom to Victoria of Kent and Elizabeth II, Queen of the United Kingdom to Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh (this template includes princesses, which is why queens regnant should be reffered to by their highest preregnal title; also, queens regnant of the United Kingdom shouldn't use the same format as British princesses who became queens consort of other kingdoms)
Victoria Melita, Grand Duchess of Hesse, Grand Duchess of Russia to either:

Victoria Melita, Grand Duchess of Hesse or
Victoria Melita, Grand Duchess Viktoria of Russia

Lady Louise Windsor to Louise of Wessex (it's pointless to include her among the princesses and yet list her as Lady Louise Windsor) Surtsicna (talk) 09:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the first point, I could concede. On the second, I was really just going for a historically-whole picture, mostly because I'm unsure which one to choose... On the third, we absolutely cannot refer to her as "Louise of Wessex" — she has never been that, and under Her Majesty's will (no less!) she is called "Lady Louise Windsor". All this talk of "Princess Louise of Wessex", both on Wikipedia and elsewhere on the internets, is just a legal fiction, because it does not matter what her "princess name" would have been, she is Lady Louise Windsor (believe me, I've seen her travelling cases waiting in Buck House's bowels, labelled "Lady Louise"). No matter whether we randomly decree as a community (overruling the Queen somehow) that she is technically a princess (and therefore include her here), she has never had a princessly title, so "Lady Louise Windsor" she must remain. Also, Prince and Princess Christian, if you aren't familiar, dropped his territorial design (of Schleswig-Holstein) in the 1917 Windsor move D B D 09:52, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad we agree on first two points. As for the third one, it is a really difficult case. I know that we shouldn't pretend to know better than Queen and other authorities. I thought it was best to either exclude her or call her Louise of Wessex if she is included, but now I've changed my mind - having her included as Lady Louise Windsor isn't so bad as I thought. As for Prince and Princess Christian, you are absolutely right about dropping their territorial designation, but it's not entirely wrong to call her Princess Christian of Schleswig-Holstein because that's the title she used for more than 50 years (bear in mind that she was simply Princess Christian for only 6 years). Anyway, the important thing is to make it clear that Helena married into the House of Oldenburg (Schleswig-Holstein branch). We cannot conclude this if her husband's name is the only given information. Surtsicna (talk) 19:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so Lady Louise & of S-H, then? D B D 19:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if it's okay with you. Surtsicna (talk) 20:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, we forgot about Victoria Melita. I am not sure which title to choose either. Perhaps Grand Duchess of Hesse should take priority because she is best known as a British princess who married and divorced the Grand Duke of Hesse. Also, Victoria was the Grand Duchess of Hesse and later a Grand Duchess of Russia. So, shall we go for Grand Duchess of Hesse? Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hesse it is, seeing as she was once The Grand Duchess consort there D B D 21:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additioanl titles

What about adding marks about the princesses' other titles, for example Hanover, Sachsen-Coburg and Gotha? Kowalmistrz (talk) 10:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 July 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please remove the brackets around Princess Caroline Mathilde of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, as she no longer has her own article. 24.14.169.44 (talk) 00:30, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done but it does redirect to an appropriate target. DrKay (talk) 07:01, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please remove the link to Princess Caroline Mathilde of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha per the decision at Template:Austrian archdukes and Template:Tuscan princes that people without articles shouldn't be included in these templates. 2601:241:300:B610:FD72:E8C8:A75A:CC6C (talk) 03:20, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done She's not a 'descendant of Tuscan nobility born after 1860' or a 'descendant of Austrian nobility born after 1918'. DrKay (talk) 07:54, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The request is based on the fact that she does not have an article. The removals on Template:Austrian archdukes and Template:Tuscan princes weren't based on them being born after the abolition of the monarchies. Tuscan princes born before 1860 and Austrian Archdukes born before 1918 who don't have articles were removed from those lists, so the same should apply to others for consistency. 2601:241:300:b610:ac1b:2869:b7ef:5fd4 (talk) 13:43, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see any consensus for this edit. DrKay (talk) 13:50, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added entries back to those pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:300:B610:516:4427:93AF:917D (talk) 14:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change the link for Princess Caroline to Princess Caroline. 98.228.137.44 (talk) 03:23, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]