→Elizabeth II: cmt |
|||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
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 [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 16:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC) |
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 [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 16:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC) |
||
:I believe just plain "Elizabeth" would be fine after the first reference. [[User talk:Hot Stop|Hot Stop]] [[Special:Contributions/Hot Stop|(c)]] 16:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC) |
:I believe just plain "Elizabeth" would be fine after the first reference. [[User talk:Hot Stop|Hot Stop]] [[Special:Contributions/Hot Stop|(c)]] 16:52, 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) |
Revision as of 17:53, 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)