Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Royalty/Style guide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Royalty

1 Nature
2 Intro para
3 Titles in places outside the UK
4 Too many commas!
5 Trivia and cultural references
6 Legacy section

[edit] Nature

Must we have such a rigid style of having articles? Though I do like the way it's done, I believe we can be a bit flexible. Like not all the articles must follow this style and this is just a guideline. We can always tweak the article and someone else will also tweak the article. But we need a standard format though. --Ter e nce Ong _{(T | C)} 12:59, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Yup, that's my thinking. Except less coherent. :D // D B D 13:12, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Intro para

The highest title (rather than Prince X, Duke of Y) should go in the intro and earlier titles should not be in the parentheses, but should be in the titles section and introduced as the article progresses. Charles 16:05, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Sure, that's a good solution - my suggestion would be that any really common titles be in the intro para - for instance see Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon - the example provided in my fictitious style guide is simply to show how any type of title would be listed there... // D B D 17:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Titles in places outside the UK

What is to happen with those styles that whomever is the Monarch of the United Kingdom also holds outside of the UK - such as in the Isle of Man, Islands of Guernsey & Jersey, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, and Saint Kitts and Nevis? --G2bambino 18:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, your solution, of having headers, fits well with the style of the Honours section, but, I hesitate to point out, the Isles of Man, Guernsey and Jersey are parts/dependencies of the UK. My solution of a link to the Sovereign's styles article provides that further information if so required, but without clogging up the article space. Besides, the Lordship of Mann and Dukedom of Normandy are both considered subsidiary titles of the substantive Crown - if these appear, why not the Dukedom of Lancaster, by which the monarch is sometimes referred in Lancashire? As for the substantive titles you mention, like the sovereignty of the individual Commonwealth realms, HM The Queen is referred to as such in each place, and all of them are listed later on in the article – D B D does... 18:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I see; I (mis)understood the nature of the Isles of Mann, Guernsey and Jersey to be that they are Crown dependancies, but also separate to the United Kingdom - hence a different territory. The Dukedom of Lancaster, however, I believe, falls within the juridiction of the United Kingdom. This then begs the question: are titles listed by territory or by crown? --G2bambino 19:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd've thought crown - the dependencies are listed on the crown's wiki page anyway. And also, it isn't begging the question. "Begging the question" is the name of a specific fallacy, which means to argue, assuming in your premises, the truth of your conclusion. You mean "raises the question". It's okay, though, very common mistake - go forth and tell all! :D – D B D 14:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too many commas!

It is not necessary to set off every date with commas, and this guide also includes plenty of comma splices. For example: "The Duchess of Nod, died in soon after the birth of their youngest child" is wrongly punctuated. A comma there isn't just unnecessary: it's wrong.

Recently, the article at Prince George, Duke of Kent was edited to conform to this style guide, resulting in sentences like: "He held the title of Duke of Kent, from 1934, to his death, in 1942." Laura1822 17:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

The former may be erroneous, but the latter is not. It's just exemplary English grammar... – D B D 20:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Dan, I didn't mean to step on your toes. I just realized that you both proposed this style guide and edited the Duke of Kent's article. You did solicit discussion! I maintain that the commas in that particular sentence are disruptive, and that stylistically, the template as a whole has so many commas that it is difficult to read. But I've no desire to start an edit war, so I won't start changing anything (please note that I posted here before changing anything!); I will, however, ask several people who might be interested in developing the concept (which is excellent, and you are to be commended) and improving upon it to participate. Kindest regards! Laura1822 16:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

That's all fine and dandy - I'm aware that my use of proper grammar, punctuation etc. can confuse; I'd really love to have some discussion, input and improvement on the style guide! Cheers! – D B D 16:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it confuses because you are not using proper grammar or punctuation. john k 04:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I am. Perhaps my manner may sometimes seem peculiar - but that's only because so few use correct grammar these days. Terrible – D B D 18:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm very sorry to break this to you, but you are not. I'd suggest you review some sort of usage guide and get back to us, preferably with a lengthy apology for subjecting us to your horrible comma usage. john k 22:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

You can start by searcing google for comma usage and clicking on just about any of the links. This one, for instance. john k 22:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Laura and John, the commas are excessive and reduce readability rather than enhance it. DrKiernan 16:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia and cultural references

These sections won't fly if you're suggesting that they be formatted as lists. The editors at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates hate them. Peer review of George VI and Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon has also shown that such sections must be formatted as prose if the articles have any hope of reaching FA status. DrKiernan 16:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)