# Talk:King George VI Memorial Chapel

Thank you and well done No Swan So Fine for this timely and efficient creation. 
Just to note, I don't love the photo very much though of course it is much much better than nothing and is absolutely of value to the article because we can see how the thing looks! But it is old and small and not great generally (hello Geograph from 2003!) and I imagine that if we keep looking we might with luck find something better, eventually, or an editor with a camera will find themselves there, or whatever. For now I have cropped it a bit to diminish the foreground tarmac area which was a bit much, and I hope that has helped. 
Well done again for getting this done!
Cheers DBaK (talk) 18:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

It is awful, for what will be one of the most viewed articles on the site next week. I'll take proper reference ones next summer. No Swan So Fine (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
That would be great, thank you! DBaK (talk) 08:09, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Are the coffins just placed in the soil below the slab and then piled over with soil like a standard graveyard,or is there a crypt down there with shelves? Romomusicfan (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't know who deleted the section on Interment Chamber, but it was all explained there and in the references given. It is a crypt, not a place with soil. Friothaire (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
The source was The Sun which was deprecated under WP:THESUN.  The section was de-sourced by David Gerard and then deleted as unsourced by No Swan So Fine.  I've trimmed out the bits about management and put in a reliable source (CNN) which affirms the basic nature of the chamber as a crypt, not soil.Romomusicfan (talk) 08:40, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
I don't love the current wording or position of this. It seems a bit arsey-versey and weirdly blunt. I've had a go at the wording but I didn't do a very good job, and I wonder if we can find a better home for the subsection??? DBaK (talk) 10:35, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
I think your version is fine.  Crypts are a fairly creepy concept anyway - unless you're refrigerating the bodies with a view to reanimating them some day then what is the point of not sticking them in the ground for recycling?  However some people go in for that (see the Ancient Egyptians and pyramids) so it's worth making it clear what the setup is - Soil vs Shelves.Romomusicfan (talk) 11:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Someone dropped in the new photo of the replacement ledger stone, someone else removed it on the grounds that it had no licence, I replaced on the grounds that I thought it looked like it did, and now I'm worried that I was wrong and the remover was right. Crisis of faith, an ting. I think I am going to re-remove it, on the grounds that it is sometimes better to err on the side of caution, and then hope that someone with more clue than I have (this is not a high barrier to overcome) will say or do something that looks or sounds authoritative. Best to all DBaK (talk) 07:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Whilst there are multiple journalistic sources that attest to the ledger stone being replaced by a new one in 2022, and many are usually reliable, all of the sources are very similar in wording. 
This implies that all are simply regurgitating a single common piece
I cannot yet find the press release that accompanied the photograph that was released to see what was actually said. 
Clearly we can’t allow original research, but viewing the image shows a marked difference in the colour of the lettering, which very much suggests that this is the original stone with additional inscriptions 2A02:C7C:5E6B:D600:3036:98F0:3AF1:5955 (talk) 04:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)