No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
::No, the correct form of address is either "Her Majesty" or "the Queen", once it has been establised who she is and what she does (this in done in the lede). [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 17:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC) |
::No, the correct form of address is either "Her Majesty" or "the Queen", once it has been establised who she is and what she does (this in done in the lede). [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 17:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC) |
||
Referring to her as "Elizabeth" is as crass as referring to President McAleese as "Mary" or President Obama as "Barack", but then this entire page reads as if it has been edited by Gerry Adams. |
Referring to her as "Elizabeth" is as crass as referring to President McAleese as "Mary" or President Obama as "Barack", but then this entire page reads as if it has been edited by Gerry Adams.--[[User:Wessexboy|Wessexboy]] ([[User talk:Wessexboy|talk]]) 19:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:29, 17 May 2011
United Kingdom Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Ireland Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Some news stories to use as sources
[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22] Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 09:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Sections
As it's a four day visit, it would seem logical to have a section for each day of the visit. Another possibility is a section on international reaction to the visit, should there be any. Mjroots (talk) 11:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Change of title?
Perhaps the title of the article should be changed to "Queen Elizabeth II's visit to the Republic of Ireland as seen by the Guardian"? --89.216.218.134 (talk) 16:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Lol, other sources are available, as they say on the BBC. Feel free to add some yourself. Mjroots (talk) 16:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Ha! Good one. Perhaps you need to edit it, with references, to restore the WP:NPOV which you think is missing. But I do like your turn of phrase. :) DBaK (talk) 16:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Elizabeth II
To me the repeated references to "Elizabeth II" read very, very oddly indeed. OK I am not the most fanatical obsessive about royal matters (I fear I read the wrong newspaper, in fact ^^) but surely it's normal, without subscribing to any particular school of thought or PoV, to just call her "the Queen" since I think we've established which particular queen the article is about? "Liz" would seem a bit informal and "the Queen" does seem to be a pretty common usage. Well, not common common, that would be vulgar of me, but you know what I mean. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 16:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- I believe just plain "Elizabeth" would be fine after the first reference. Hot Stop (c) 16:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Referring to her as "Elizabeth" is as crass as referring to President McAleese as "Mary" or President Obama as "Barack", but then this entire page reads as if it has been edited by Gerry Adams.--Wessexboy (talk) 19:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)