Jump to content

Talk:Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

She isn't styled Honourable Lady Ogilvy so I moved back to here, Princess Alexandra of Kent. Astrotrain 20:32, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)

Has her style changed, then? Proteus (Talk) 20:44, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't think she was ever officially styled Hon Lady Ogilvy. She is styled HRH Princess Alexandra per the court circular and the royal.gov.uk website. I can't see why she would add the lowly style of a Lady to her Princess style in any case.

In any case, her husband is dead, and I believe Wikipedia always use the pre-marital name for the title of women when the husband is dead. Astrotrain 20:57, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)

No, pre-marital names are used of certain consorts when they themselves are dead. Such as dead queens. I doubt that Alexandra even is one of such consorts who reverses to pre-marital name on basis of that nomenclature rule. (Though I am somewhat against using the unnecessarily lengthening Hon L Ogilvy, let's however be honest how to use the "pre-marital convention".) 217.140.193.123 18:10, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Debrett's Correct Form has "the Hon. Lady Ogilvy" on the end of her style, and see this page on the Royal website. Princesses always add the "lowly" styles of their husbands on to the end of their Royal styles ("HRH The Princess Anne, Mrs Mark Phillips", for instance). As to your second paragraph, that's simply not true. Proteus (Talk) 21:10, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, I do realise that some sources add Hon Lady Ogilvy to her style. However, Alexandra is always styled HRH Princess Alexandra in the court circular and HRH Princess Alexandra of Kent before her marriage. I was under the belief that Princesses only add peerage titles to their style. Anne was never officially styled Mrs Mark Phillips.

My second point was that we have HRH Princess Marina of Greece and Denmark instead of HRH Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent. Also Wikipedia never use the Hon style in article titles.

Perhaps, we could add her Hon Lady Ogilvy to the introductory paragraph? Astrotrain 19:04, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

The Court Circular often uses shortened versions of styles (it omits "the Rt Hon.", "the Most Hon." and "His/Her Grace" for peers, for instance), and the Princess Royal was indeed formally styled "Her Royal Highness The Princess Anne, Mrs Mark Phillips" between her first marriage and her creation as Princess Royal. "The Honourable" is indeed normally not used in article titles, but then it's normally at the beginning and can be snipped off quite easily - removing it in this case would leave Princess Alexandra, Lady Ogilvy (which is actually what she should be styled, but that's another matter entirely). Princess Marina was at the wrong place. I've moved it. Proteus (Talk) 19:17, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It would be good if here in Wikipedia editors would omit titulary as much as the Court Circular - at least from article headings. IMO there is no need to put everything ionto the heading, a simpler version would be good. 217.140.193.123 18:10, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

HRH Princess Alexandra - Couture John Kavanagh

[edit]

I am very blessed to have in my possesion 2 beautiful couture cocktail dresses worn by HRH. I now live in New Zealand and would dearly love to pass them on to someone who has the know how to preserve them. I have a letter of provenance. I may be travelling soon to the Uk.

banjip2000@paradise.net.nz

Angela Burton formerly of Cambridge

Styles according to London Gazette.

[edit]

From her marriage to Angus Ogilvy to his being created a knight in 1989, she was styled "HRH Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Mrs. Angus Ogilvy."

(to view the links, you need Adobe Acrobat Reader)

"The QUEEN has been pleased [...] to re-appoint Her Royal Highness Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Mrs. Angus Ogilvy, G.C.V.O. (President), to be..."

"PRINCESS ALEXANDRA, THE HONOURABLE MRS. ANGUS OGILVY has been pleased to make the following appointments to Her Royal Highness's household..."

"Her Majesty The QUEEN is graciously pleased to order the following appointment: H.R.H. Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Mrs. Angus Ogilvy, G.C.V.O., ..."

  • Sorry, forgot to show the source for that one. Matjlav 18:21, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Princess Alexandra was styled "HRH Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy" from 1989 to 1997, unlike Proteus claims. The London Gazette refers to her as such:

(again, to view the links, you need Adobe Acrobat Reader)

"To be lieutenants: [...] Captain Robert Neil BLAIR, R.N., Private Secretary to [...] Princess Alexandra, the Honourable Lady Ogilvy"

"Her Majesty The QUEEN has been graciously pleased to give orders [...] for the following appointments: [...] Her Royal Highness Princess Alexandra, the Honourable Lady OGILVY, G.C.V.O., ..."

"PRINCESS ALEXANDRA, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy has been pleased..."

The changes I'm about to make to the style list are quite well-backed, as you can see. If Proteus cites a reliable source to show me otherwise, I'd be glad to hear out his point, and I'm sure we could come to a consensus. But until then, keep it like it is. Matjlav 18:17, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • I may also want to add that a search for "Princess Alexandra, Lady Ogilvy" returned NO hits. Matjlav 18:41, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Since Princess Alexandra's late husband was appointed to the Garter she has ALWAYS been offically HRH Princess Alexandra, the Hon. Lady Ogilvy not merely Princess Alexandra, Lady Ogilvy.

Queen Brandissima

Image:Alexandra independence.jpg

[edit]

This image is not marked as fair use and its source is unavailable. Can its status please be clarified? Johnleemk | Talk 09:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

just putting this here so it wont be lost [1]

Mistake in the arms

[edit]

The description of the labels on the coat of arms does not match the illustration (central label is a cross of St. George rather than a heart). I believe the illustration is correct and the description is wrong. 80.216.67.89 14:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct name of article

[edit]

Articles should never include styles in their title, and this page is at first glance the only one to do so.[2]. WP:NCNT gives some guidance on how to name articles on royals. The section "Other royals" clearly states in point 3: "Do not use styles as part of a title of an article". Now, the simple removal of the style from the article name (changing it to Princess Alexandra, Lady Ogilvy" was reversed as "wrong", even though it is used regularly by reliable sources (e.g. the National Portrait Gallery). I have no particular preference for this title though, I can live just as well with Princess Alexandra of Kent or Princess Alexandra with a disambiguation added. I suppose the people interested in this article can decide what the best name for this article would be, provided that they stick to the Wikipedia guidelines. All suggestions are welcome. Fram (talk) 13:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Princess Alexandra of Kent" is incorrect, as this was her pre-maritial style. She is now correctly known as "Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy". With Royalty "reliable" sources are often wrong - even the broadsheets and BBC called Diana "Princess Diana". Yes we should not use "HRH" or "HM" in article titles, but to say we shouldn't use "The Honourable" is riduclous. She is not correclty styled "Lady Ogilvy" and it is misleading to to suggest she is. It would be like calling Diana "Princess Diana". She's simply not.--UpDown (talk) 18:10, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and this is the only one to do so because there is no other member of the British Royal Family (or has there ever been I believe), who was an HRH and married an Honourable - in other words, Alexandra is the only person who has this style. I agree that the younger son of a baron should not have Honourable in their article title, but this is different.--UpDown (talk) 18:12, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If she gets "The Honourable" because she married a man who had that style, why didn't she become "The Right Honourable Lady Ogilvy" when he acquired that style a few years before his death? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 03:27, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you. The article of Mark Thatcher is not named "The Honourable Sir Mark Thatcher" either. --Clithering (talk) 11:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Her husband became the Right Honourable because he was appointed to the privy council. The style of privy councillors isn't transferred by marriage like the styles of being the son of a noble. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.126.10.157 (talk) 13:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sir Angus Ogilvy was indeed "The Hon" from birth, but his article is plain Angus Ogilvy. So, why does his wife/widow get "the Hon" in her article title? Remember, we're not debating about anyone's style in real life; just the title of the Wikipedia article about them. Our protocols rule here. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 11:27, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone? -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 06:01, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, given the lack of response, I've been WP:BOLD and moved it to "Princess Alexandra, Lady Ogilvy". -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 04:34, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But now it's been moved back. User:DBD, let us please discuss this and sort this issue out once and for all. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:06, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well, if you don't want to defend your position, that's ok by me. I've moved it back to where it should be. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 13:21, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And now User:DBD has reverted me again, once more without entering into this discussion. I've asked him on his talk page to stop edit warring, and either revert himself or come here and explain his position in a more compelling way than "correct style" (in his edit summary). And I've foreshadowed further action if he does not do this. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 00:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UpDown (talk · contribs) expressed the situation sufficiently. If I'm honest, I did not notice that you JackofOz (talk · contribs) had moved it here several times and believed you had good reason; I simply reacted to a title which was factually inaccurate. For that it seems I owe you an apology. Now, I can very well sympathise with your assertion that Honourable ought generally not to appear in article names, inventing an inaccurate version of Alexandra's title is not the answer. Perhaps we could agree on a compromise? Princess Alexandra of Kent hasn't been correct for 53 years, and I don't think we could argue primary usage... Princess Alexandra (born 1936)? DBD 13:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Can you explain to me why this is "inaccurate"? Can you answer my question above: Sir Angus Ogilvy was indeed "The Hon" from birth, but his article is plain Angus Ogilvy. So, why does his wife/widow get "the Hon" in her article title? -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 09:42, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, sure; of course. It's because when we refer to Angus Ogilvy (and create an article at his common name, obeying MOS rules re: The Rt Hon and Sir) we are using a common name rather than a precise style. Contrariwise, Alexandra's article is currently placed at her correct style (less HRH because of MOS article title limitations) in order to dab her from other Princesses Alexandra. If we were attempting instead to put her at her common name, it would be Princess Alexandra (see my above comment). DBD 17:12, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Family Troubles

[edit]

This section reads as though it has had part of it cut out - presumably a reference to her daughter Marina's controversial marriage. Unless Marina is to have an article of her own, I think it would be appropriate to update us here on her later life. 86.138.158.107 (talk) 16:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Four years on, with her children now adult, under my new signed-in title, I still think this. Valetude (talk) 22:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the Airlie remainder

[edit]
Angus Ogilvy remained in line to the Earldom of Airlie until his death.

Why is this worth mentioning? It's exceedingly rare to lose such a position. —Tamfang (talk) 20:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Picture

[edit]

Is there a newer picture that can be used? The one currently on the page is almost fifty years old, which hardly makes sense when she is still alive.

Style

[edit]

Some - notably Michael De-La-Noy in 'The Honours System' (Allison & Busby, London, 1985, p.44) - contend that her correct style as the daughter of a duke should be Princess Alexandra, Lady Alexandra Ogilvy. (If this is correct the same applies to Princess Anne, whose subsidiary style should be Lady Anne Laurence.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winehoff (talk • contribs) 09:22, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:HRH The Princess Alexandra.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:HRH The Princess Alexandra.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 03:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

affair with Philip???

[edit]

Does anyone know the guidelines for a credible source? According to Nicholas Davies' "A Woman Who is NOT Amused", a bio of Queen Elizabeth II, the Duke of Edinburgh and Princess Alexandra, the Lady Ogilvy had a sexual affair for thirty or more years. Is this a credible enough source to add to her page or idle gossip? There seeems to be trimming of Wikipedia articles regarding such things to ensure an "offical" line from the Royal Family, regardless of whether the information is credible. What is the standard? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.127.200 (talk) 01:41, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"retirement?"

[edit]

Judging from the Court Circular, I would say it's reasonably safe to assume the Princess Alexandra has gone into retirement or semi-retirement. She has not had more than a handful of engagements listed in the Circular in the last six months. Similar to her brother, the Duke of Kent, who's recovering from stroke; why do we people think he rode in the Queen's carriage in place of the Duke of Edinburgh? Answer: After a stroke, it's difficult to successfully mount and ride a horse for the length of time necessary. 67.247.138.165 (talk) 02:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria

[edit]

Both Princess Beatrice and Princess Victoria were dead by the time Elizabeth II ascended the throne, Beatrice in 1944 and Victoria in 1935. The only senior female royals then were: The Queen, the Queen Mother, the Princess Margaret, the Duchess of Gloucester, the Dowager Duchess of Kent, Princess Mary, Princess Royal and Countess of Harewood and Princess Alice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.67.32.161 (talk) 21:20, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fairly doubtful claim, as Queen Mary was still alive when Elizabeth II ascended the throne.Lathamibird (talk) 07:30, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

She was also not nearly 16 years old at the time of her cousin's succession . She was only just 15 years old having passed her birthday by a mere 6 weeks . How is this nearly 16? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.16.6.172 (talk) 23:08, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed it to 15. Thanks! Celia Homeford (talk) 07:00, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy. 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) 10:09, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Issue

[edit]

What does the section "Issue" refer to in this context, and can it be stated more simply or linked to an explanation? Hyeoman (talk) 06:53, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

it's being used in the sense of 'progeny', or 'all lineal descendants'. See definitions at https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/issue#Noun. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:01, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zenouska Mowatt exists.

[edit]

Article Succession to the British throne states that number 63 (and last) of the succession to the British throne is Zenouska Mowatt born in 1990. King George V's youngest son was Prince George (Duke of Kent). And his youngest child is Princess Alexandra (The Honourable Lady Ogilvy). And she gave birth to Marina Ogilvy who gave birth to Zenouska Mowatt. (As of the mentioned article and as I understand it). How to solve this issue regarding our articles is not something I've thought of. However I find it wrong to link a person's name to the article on her grandmother. 83.250.73.248 (talk) 01:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 July 2023

[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: After thorough discussion, it has been clearly supported that the article page should remain having the title of Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Oglivy. I thank you all for your thoughts and opinions, yet we must remember that we have to follow Wikipedia's thorough guidelines for page articles and we still, through discussion, must remain civil. That is all. BillClinternet (talk) 17:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy → Princess Alexandra of Kent – She is mostly known due to her father, Prince George of Kent and her cousin-ship to Elizabeth II, not as her role as the Lady Oglivy. Most people search for her as simply Princess Alexandra or Princess Alexandra of Kent. Even on the website, https://www.royal.uk/princess-alexandra it doesn't mention her role as the Lady Oglivy other than the mentioning of her marriage to Angus Oglivy and mostly she's referred to as Princess Alexandra on the Royal Family's social media.
It states on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility): "Use "Prince(ss) {first name} of ..." where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title, e.g. Prince Michael of Kent"
I would also like to point out that Alexandra doesn't have a substantive title, meaning that she didn't inherit the title Lady Oglivy, but received it through her marriage to the late Angus Oglivy.

I ask for your opinions.

That's all,
BillClinternet (talk) 22:04, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to point out to whoever says that it isn't her title, the proposal for Princess Alexandra of Kent is perfectly fine because it follows Wikipedia:COMMONNAME, and there are common examples through people like Mary of Teck, whose article isn't Queen Mary of the United Kingdom Princess Alice of the United Kingdom, whose article isn't Grand Duchess Alice of Hesse and by Rhine. By examination, most people refer to her as simply Princess Alexandra, but for encyclopedic purposes, should have her title re-named to Princess Alexandra of Kent. There's also Princess Helena of the United Kingdom, whose article wasn't named Princess Helena of Shleswig-Holstein.
As I also said before it also follows Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility): "Use "Prince(ss) {first name} of ..." where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title, e.g. Prince Michael of Kent" as I said before.
BillClinternet (talk) 22:23, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - As the nom state, she is most commonly known as Princess Alexandra, but obvious that's ambiguous. Technically, "Princess Alexandra, the Honourable Lady Ogilvy" is her formal title. What I see here is a classic case of misunderstanding NCROY (at least based on the provided examples): Mary of Teck and Princesses Alice and Helena of the United Kingdom are all dead, that is why their titles are at their birth names.
I think since plain "Princess Alexandra" is the COMMONNAME here, it's best to just stick to her official name until after her death, then it'd be more appropriate to move back to her birth name.
(Quick side note though- I do wonder if "The" should be capitalized. It's not on the royal website, so perhaps that should be discussed). estar8806 (talk) ★ 12:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand this opposition, I am just making a comment on the "the." Most, if not every title in the United Kingdom, have the capitalized "the". The Princess Margaret. The Queen; although it's not grammatically correct, it is most definitely how they do it. When Edward VIII abdicated, it stated:
I, Edward the Eighth, of Great Britain, [...], do hereby declare My irrevocable determination to renounce the Throne for Myself and for my descendants, [...] effect should be given to this Instrument of Abdication immediately.
"Throne", a common noun; "My", a common noun; and "Myself" a common noun; are capitalized. There's no clear explanation to to that.
I would also like to point out this may because of a "proper noun phrase" also known as a "proper noun name".
Example: India's Ministry of Defense is planning on releasing a statement concerning the number of servicemen who died in the war.
Example: Queen Victoria's Small Diamond Crown sat upon her head for the photograph.
Although, below is not how you use it;
Example: Queen Victoria had a Small Diamond Crown. This sentence is speaking of any ambiguous small diamond crown, but the specific one is that being Queen Victoria's. The correct version should be Queen Victoria had a small diamond crown.
Another example with titles. Earl of Sandwich, alone, would be "earl of Sandwich", but when you are placing the word "earl" in lieu of the name, or if it is attached to the name like "John Doe, 1st Earl of Sandwich". Grammatically, any word can be a proper noun. The only thing that dictates a proper noun is that it refers to a person, place, or thing and is usually specific. Although if I say "my", a possessive pronoun, I could also style it "My" if I'd like to because it is a specific word referring to me, BillClinternet. Technically, it is correct.
So when you consider if "the" would be capitalized, it most likely would.
BillClinternet (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it generally should be capitalized. It is generally correct. But here it doesn't seem to be. The official royal website uses "Princess Alexandra, the Honourable Lady Ogilvy" in the same document as "The King" and "The Duke and Duchess of Kent" (capitalized "The")[3]. The same can be said for the London Gazette, which uses "The Queen" but "Princess Alexandra, the Honourable Lady Ogilvy" [4]. As you said in the nomination, she didn't inherit the title Lady Oglivy; ie. "the Honourable Lady Ogilvy" is not a substantive title like "The Queen" or "The Duke of Kent".
I'm not personally opposed to "The" being capitalized. But it seems as though the sources don't use it capitalized. estar8806 (talk) ★ 16:34, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Completely agree. I've always thought that this is a very weird title and not her common name (which is, of course, just Princess Alexandra, but the "of Kent" is a perfectly acceptable disambiguator just like her brother Prince Michael of Kent). When do we ever use honorifics like "Honourable" in article titles? -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:47, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose She hasn't been "Princess Alexandra of Kent" since 1963 (60 years ago!) and the sources attest to that. In The London Gazette, she is referred to as "Princess Alexandra of Kent" in 1959, "Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Mrs Angus Ogilvy" in 1969, and "Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy" in 2018. The territorial designations are dropped when a British princess gets married; the most recent examples are Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice. I wouldn't oppose a move to "Princess Alexandra", which would be consistent in format to the way Beatrice and Eugenie's articles have been titled, but if that move is not possible the current title is the most recent and accurate one and it does not matter how weird it might sound because that's not a valid reason for moving a page. A case for moving the page to her maiden name and title could be made after her death, but even then a move cannot be guaranteed because we have pages that favor the most recent title over the maiden name such as Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone (whose maiden name was Princess Alice of Albany), etc. Keivan.fTalk 14:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • it does not matter how weird it might sound because that's not a valid reason for moving a page. Oh, but it is. We don't use "Sir" or "Dame" or "The Honourable" or "The Right Honourable" to disambiguate people in any other case, even if it is the correct form. So why are we using it here? Princess Alexandra, Lady Ogilvy would be just about acceptable (and just as accurate), but not the form as it current stands with the honorific. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:21, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The royal family refers to her as "Princess Alexandra [of Kent]". Wallis Simpson, although she remained the Duchess of Windsor, her page has always been named Wallis Simpson, because that is her Wikipedia:COMMONNAME. Per the naming conventions for royalty and nobility, there are 4/5 things that the new title would do that apply to the conventions.
    1: Use "Prince(ss) {first name} of ..." where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title, e.g. Prince Michael of Kent, Prince Arthur of Connaught, etc.
    Alexandra of Kent has a territorial suffix "of Kent" due to her father, George, Duke of Kent.
    2: Where they have no substantive title, use the form "{title} {name} of {country}", e.g. Princess Irene of Greece and Denmark. Use only the highest prefix title the person ever held and used (roughly before the 17th century, prince/ss would not be prefixed automatically).
    3: Do not use styles, such as HRH, as part of a title of an article.
    Obviously, it would not be titled as HRH or Her Royal Highness, Princess Alexandra of Kent.
    She has no substantive title, meaning that she did not inherit the title of "The Honorable Lady Oglivy".
    4: Do not use surnames in article titles for such persons. If royals have surnames, then this information should be mentioned in the first line of the article (but care should be taken, as many do not have surnames, and personal surnames may differ from the name of their Royal House). For details, see WP:Manual of Style (biographies)#Royal surnames.
    Alexandra does have the surname of Oglivy, yet, she belongs to the House of Windsor, similar how to you refer to Queen Camilla as Queen Camilla and not as Camilla Parker-Bowles, Camilla Mountbatten-Windsor (since she is married to a descendant of Elizabeth II and Philip, Duke of Edinburgh).
    There is always a Wikipedia:Commonname conflict when naming articles, but she is mostly known as, by both the royal family and the general public. It doesn't matter how different it sounds from her original title, that is what she's known as.
    Another thing to point out is that there have been many more "Princess Alexandra of [...]"s as oppose to the much fewer "Princess Beatrice of [...]"s. It is similar to the Charles III "debate", but with a clear answer.
    6 Beatrices.
    16 Alexandras.
    Princess Alexandra of Kent would most definitely be sensible and there should be little to no opposition. I understand your arguments, but yours just don't make sense considering the Wikipedia:COMMONNAME and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility).
    That's all.
    BillClinternet (talk) 16:55, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    After a bit of thinking and researching, I personally think that a move to plain Princess Alexandra is our best bet. The majority of pageviews go to her from the dab page [5]. estar8806 (talk) ★ 17:22, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's only just over half of outgoing page views, which does not seem sufficient to meet the standard of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, which requires that the primary topic be substantially more sought than all the other topics combined. DrKay (talk) 17:39, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is true, however, I would presume that most people would be searching "King Charles" rather than "Charles III"; "King Charles" being the long-term usage topic whilst "Charles III" being the primary topic.
    The same goes for Alexandra.
    BillClinternet (talk) 19:46, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 2nd suggestion then Even if users at King Charles predominantly go to Charles III[6] that doesn't mean we should move the article there because Charles Windsor is not the overwhelming primary topic for "King Charles". Similarly, Alexandra Ogilvy is not the overwhelming primary topic for "Princess Alexandra". DrKay (talk) 20:37, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't justify the commonname and the literal page naming guide for royalty. BillClinternet (talk) 00:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, there have been far less Princess Eugenie and Beatrices than Princess Alexandras. Naming the article simply Princess Alexandra ambiguously would be non-sensible, and since she has no substantive title and would use "of Kent" due to the role of her father. BillClinternet (talk) 19:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The royal family refers to her as "Princess Alexandra [of Kent]". You just threw in [of Kent] in there. The royal family's website uses no territorial designations for her at the moment.
Use "Prince(ss) {first name} of ..." where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title This doesn't apply to Alexandra. The territorial designations are dropped when a British princess gets married and picks her husband's surname, or, when a British prince is granted a peerage. She has not been "of anything" for 60 years and the role of her father which you bring up is irrelevant. Any other suggestions fall under WP:OR.
Alexandra does have the surname of Oglivy, yet, she belongs to the House of Windsor, similar how to you refer to Queen Camilla as Queen Camilla and not as Camilla Parker-Bowles, Camilla Mountbatten-Windsor (since she is married to a descendant of Elizabeth II and Philip, Duke of Edinburgh). The comparison here makes zero sense. Queens do not carry a surname as part of their title because they are married to kings who typically have no surnames either. Charles III is never called "HM The King Charles III Mountbatten-Windsor". He is "His Majesty The King" and his wife is "Her Majesty The Queen". Princess Anne, however, was once "HRH The Princess Anne, Mrs Mark Phillips"[1] before being created Princess Royal. Similarly Beatrice's official title is "HRH Princess Beatrice, Mrs Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi" and Eugenie's official title is "HRH Princess Eugenie, Mrs Jack Brooksbank".[2] They actually carry these surnames as part of their titles.
there have been far less Princess Eugenie and Beatrices than Princess Alexandras. There have been several princesses with the name Beatrice or a variation of it, one of whom was the daughter of Queen Victoria and the other was Victoria's granddaughter (similar to how the current Princess Beatrice is a granddaughter of Elizabeth II). Users did not support a move to "Princess Beatrice, Mrs Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi" because it is archaic and includes her husband's full name. That is not the case with Alexandra. The name "Angus Olgily" appears no where in the page title. Whether the honorific "The Honourable" should be dropped, as User:Necrothesp suggested, is another matter. Keivan.fTalk 02:51, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

  1. ^ Davies, Nicholas (2013). Elizabeth II: Behind Palace Doors. Random House. ISBN 9781780578279. Until Elizabeth gave her the title, Anne's correct form of address had been a mouthful, 'Her Royal Highness The Princess Anne, Mrs Mark Phillips'.
  2. ^ "Annex D: The Royal Family" (PDF). The Royal Family. Retrieved 9 December 2020.

"Her Royal Highness Princess Alexandra Helen Elizabeth Olga Christabel, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy, Royal Lady of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Her Royal Highness Princess Alexandra Helen Elizabeth Olga Christabel, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy, Royal Lady of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 7 § Her Royal Highness Princess Alexandra Helen Elizabeth Olga Christabel, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy, Royal Lady of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order until a consensus is reached. estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy, LG, GCVO, CD" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy, LG, GCVO, CD has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 7 § Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy, LG, GCVO, CD until a consensus is reached. estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Alexandra's infobox image following her death (edit: she's not dead)

[edit]

I was thinking her infobox image could be changed to an older image following her death, similar to other members of the royal family. Moreover, we should plan this now as she is growing old and bringing most of her public appearances down.

Option A:

Option B:


We can crop Option B as needed. There is one that is already cropped; however, it's lower quality than the one I attached.
Option A is an image I actually found on Pinterest, and is evidently probably from 1952, pre-coronation, she looks impressively young in the portrait. I couldn't find matching images on TinEye, Getty Images, or Alamy.

Please vote.

Thanks,

BillClinternet (talk) 17:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should go with A; more formal and better framed. We'll discuss it in detail when the time comes. Keivan.fTalk 04:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New image for the Lady Ogilvy

[edit]

I think we should change her picture. I mean this one looks like it was cut off from a main picture. As the granddaughter of King George V and as a born british princess, I think a picture from the coronation of her cousin, Queen Elizabeth, or her cousin's son, King Charles, would go well. Just a suggestion tho :) Thanks! SferaEbbasta87 (talk) 11:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New lead image

[edit]

Hi. I recently found images on an archived version of the Royal Website (here [7]), which can be attributed to a Creative Commons license after I skimmed through on how to pick a license using information on their website. I uploaded the image to the right.

File:Princess Alexandra by Mark Stewart.jpg

It's a formal portrait of Alexandra taken by Mark Stewart in 2005 (he also did photos of other royals and as I found out is a career royal photographer). I just uploaded this one because I noticed that Alexandra was really the only royal with a bad (sorry) lead image on their page. This is my first time uploading a photo, and I don't really know if I did it right. Would anyone consider it to be a new lead image?? Rexophile (talk) 05:50, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It says "(c) Mark Stewart" at the source, so it's copyrighted. Furthermore, it doesn't allow commercial use. Licenses on wikipedia must permit commercial use unless fair use applies. Fair use does not apply in this case because free images are available. See Wikipedia:Image use policy. DrKay (talk) 07:55, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Princess_Alexandra,_The_Honourable_Lady_Ogilvy&oldid=1265712392"