Talk:Queen Letizia of Spain

message: I used "née" because I don't imagine "Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano" is her full name anymore. Wouldn't it be, if anything, "Letizia Ortiz de Borbón y Grecia"? - Montréalais 16:29, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Married women ins Spain don't use their husbands' names. So her legal name is still  doña Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano, just as Queen Sofia is still doña Sofía de Grecia.177.141.83.196 (talk) 11:59, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

text: No. See Diana, Princess of Wales. --Cantus 20:42, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: What does Diana have to do with Letizia? The Spanish naming system and the British naming system are rather different. Letizia was born Ortiz y Rocasolano, daughter of Jesus Ortiz y Alvarez del Valle and Maria Paloma Rocasolano y Rodriguez. Her maiden name (apellido de soltera) was "Letizia Ortiz y Rocasolano". A woman's married name, her apellido de casada, consists of her forename, her father's first surname, and her husband's first surname appended with a de: on marriage to a "Borbón y Grecia" she became "Letizia Ortiz de Borbón" - Nunh-huh 21:06, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

text: That's an old style tradition, no longer in practical use. As long as I know, legally women in Spain never lost their surnames after wedding and this is the convention used nowadays. ManuelGR 21:45, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: née

message: There is a lot of important information in that article. I think it is, but User:Andromeda apparently thinks not. I don't want to start a revert war about this, because I think that as it stands, the article has sufficient information. So what if she's the sister of the Crown Princess of Spain. I think her death, and the circumstances around it is notable enough to warrant her own article. Morhange 06:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am afraid that I have to agree with Andromeda. Érika Ortiz Rocasolano is not a notable enough person to have her own biography. Nobody should be able to imagine an article about her before her death. Er Komandante 20:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then maybe a subarticle from Letizia to Erika? I agree with Morhange, and I think the issue should have been at least debated before taking any action. Her death made her internationally (not locally) notable -so what's the problem? Is that against any policy? I'm not that fussed either way, but I think a subarticle would work for everyone. Raystorm 22:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erika Ortiz Rocasolano 

message: It seems the dates are off. It says she gave birth in April 2007, but died on Feb 7, 2007. I don't believe that's possible.Irishpisces 18:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Princess Letizia gave birth in April, her sister, Érika Ortiz Rocasolano, died in February. -- Arwel (talk) 21:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth after Death 

message: :Image:Letizia Ortiz Coat of Arms.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 15:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Letizia Ortiz Coat of Arms.jpg

message: Was her first husband her high-school teacher? --Error 00:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1st husband

message: Letizia was married from 1998-1999 with Alonso Guerrero y Pérez, a previous teacher of hers. What are the naming conventions for a  married woman in Spain, and how was she named and styled then? Something like Mrs. Letizia Guerrero-Ortiz?? Demophon (talk) 13:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Name Letizia during her first marriage

message: It seems to me this article needs improving substantially, but I dont know enough about the subject to tackle it myself. It does seem to contain a lot of "fluff" though, and a trivia section that (IMHO) doesnt even rate as trivia!....Should it be marked for a cleanup? Jcuk (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Fluff in article

message: I was directed to the page about the "Fast & the Furious" series when looking for this page (typing in "Leticia Ortiz"; note the spelling difference). I don't think there are any direct link paths from one page to the other. How would one go about correcting this? I am unfamiliar with the process of making a disambiguation page, and I don't know whether it would be useful or appropriate in this case. Tha Pyngwyn (talk) 14:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: . You need to click the "redirected from" link at the target article you were directed to, then edit that page to make it point to the correct page. See the edits here and here. Hope you can do it yourself next time! --Waldir talk 01:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fast & the Furious 

message: An image used in this article, File:A RESI~1.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:A RESI~1.JPG)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:A RESI~1.JPG Nominated for Deletion

message: Detailed info about honours and styles moved to List of titles and honours of Letizia, Princess of Asturias.--Galico (talk) 18:45, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Honours and styles

message: I expect that Letizia's arms will need updating, now that she is Queen consort rather than Princes of Asturias?  P M C 22:20, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arms 

message: She seems to be wearing the exact same dress in both photos, so I doubt one was taken in 2010 and the other 2011... -- AnonMoos (talk) 13:58, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The first is just a crop of the second, so I'm changing the date. Origamite\(·_·\)(/·_·)/ 14:16, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Do we need two versions of the same image at all? AlexTiefling (talk) 21:53, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo dates

message: The name of Queen Letizia has not changed from Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano to Letizia of Spain, as queens do not change their surnames in Spain. At the official biography of the Spanish Royal House, her name appears as "Her Majesty the Queen, Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano". http://www.casareal.es/ES/FamiliaReal/ReinaLetizia/Paginas/princesa_biografia.aspx  Therefore, the correct title should be, either "Queen Letizia", "Letizia, Queen of Spain", "Letizia, Queen consort of Spain" or just "Letizia Ortiz". But not "Letizia of Spain". 193.175.73.201 (talk) 09:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The article's name followed English usage before - 'Letizia, Princess of Asturias' - and will do so again if the proposed renaming to 'Queen Letizia of Spain' goes ahead. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:46, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The two situations are different. Under Royal Decree (RD) 1368/1987, which regulates the titles and styles of the Spanish Royal Family, the wife of the Prince of Asturias has the title Princess of Asturias. However, under the same RD, the wife of the King of Spain does not have the title Queen of Spain, but rather only Queen. So, Letizia's legal title in Spain is Her Majesty Queen Letizia, and not Her Majesty Queen Letizia of Spain, or Her Majesty The Queen of Spain. In particular, it is blatantly incorrect to say that Letizia is "the Queen of Spain" as written in the opening paragraph and other parts of the article, as "Queen of Spain" is a title reserved for a reigning queen only.  2804:14C:165:8EC3:C0FA:D446:67A:7BB (talk) 10:47, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

text: ...more to the point, WP:COMMONNAME applies, subject to the ambiguity about queens consort that we're trying to resolve above. Queen Letizia's full name should go in the lead of the article, not in the page title. AlexTiefling (talk) 10:03, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This article can't be called "Letizia of Spain". That name is completely wrong. I'm not saying that the full name should be use in the title. I'm saying the title name is WRONG, completely wrong. Nobody use "Letizia of Spain".--P.G.Antolinos (talk) 15:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Then go and contribute to the RM above, which proposes 'Queen Letizia of Spain' instead. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

text: User:P.G.Antolinos asked for the move as non-controversial maintenance, which is quite clearly not the case. Seven Letters 17:45, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Current name of the article is incorrect

message: User:Malik_Shabazz moved the page from "Letizia of Spain" to "Letizia Ortiz". I have reverted that move as a discussion is still underway. Seven Letters 17:33, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: User:P.G.Antolinos asked for the move as non-controversial maintenance, which is quite clearly not the case. Seven Letters 17:45, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Please do not move the page during a Requested Move discussion

message: The common practice on Wikipedia for biographies, is to match the 'name' of article's subject with its article title. Thus this article's intro name, should be Queen Letizia of Spain. What do ya'll think? GoodDay (talk) 10:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yet it's also common practice in Wikipedia biographies to start the lead sentence with the subject's full legal name, per WP:BIRTHNAME/WP:FULLNAME. The present version is the most informative and the least redundant one. "Queen Letizia of Spain is Queen of Spain" sounds quite silly, don't you think? Surtsicna (talk) 10:33, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The intro should be consistent, with the other current queen-consort intros. Again, I understand your opposition to using Queen, but you should take that concern to WP:ROY, instead of pushing it on just one article's intro. GoodDay (talk) 14:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

text: I've asked WP:ROY's opinon on current queen consort article intros. GoodDay (talk) 14:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I am afraid I have to object to your obsessiveness with "consistency" and arbitrary "rules", and we both know that I am not the first to do so. I say "obsessiveness" because you do not care at all what the sentence looks like after you "correct" it. Thus we end up with ridiculous sentences such as "Queen Letizia of Spain is Queen of Spain" and "Queen Mathilde of Belgium is Queen of Belgium". Tell me, is it more likely that a reader will open up this article and ridicule such a lead sentence, or that a reader will open up 6 articles at the same time, compare their lead sentences and find that "inconsistency" between them is intolerable? There isn't alway a one-size-fits-all. Judge each case on its own merits. Don't sacrifice quality for consistency. Surtsicna (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

text: It should be Queen Letizia of Spain (Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano) or something like that, because although it is still her legal name, it is also her premarital name as well, and her marital titles take precedence over her legal name. Seven Letters 14:36, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. The title is right, because most people will be referring to her as "The Queen of Spain" or "Queen Letizia". But if her name didn't change on marriage (separate from any titles she gained), shouldn't we lead with her full name? AlexTiefling (talk) 14:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

text: No, we don't lead with the full name for other current European royal consorts. Seven Letters 14:41, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I must echo what Surtsicna has been saying: We should write good content, not strive for needless consistency with other articles whose subjects' specifics are different. AlexTiefling (talk) 14:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, but consistency in this matter goes hand in hand with good content. The intro best reflects the subject the the article and her full name, being a less important identifying detail, follows right after. Seven Letters 14:57, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It goes hand in hand with good content, but against optimal content. The lead sentence is now unnecessarily awkward. Imagine if this article started with a sentence such as: "President Barack Obama of the United States (full name: Barack Hussein Obama) is the current President of the United States." I fail to see what kind of "consistency" is brought up as an issue; the 35 articles about her predecessors start with the subject's name, quite naturally. Why should this article be consistent with half a dozen articles about foreign queens and inconsistent with 35 articles about Spanish queens? Surtsicna (talk) 23:58, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Non-starter, using Barack Obama. Presidents bio articles are set up differently then Monarchs bio articles. Barack Obama doesn't come under WP:ROY :) GoodDay (talk) 00:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: A non-starter? It is exactly the same wording. And "WP:ROY" has nothing to say about this article or article intros. "Presidents bio articles" are set up according to common sense, much like other biographies. Royalty articles are, for some reason, being denied that privilege. Surtsicna (talk) 00:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: We're not going to agree on this article's intro, obviously. I imagine it's going to keep changing to different versions, over the next several weeks, as the sources for Queen Letizia of Spain continues to increase. Meanwhile, discussing this between ourselves is no longer productive. GoodDay (talk) 01:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Err, no, they do not. I demonstrated that down below. Surtsicna (talk) 00:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Since she's been queen-consort? GoodDay (talk) 00:55, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro 

message: I erased the "of fillipino descent" cause that simply isn't true she is not by birth/nationality nor by ancestry as the reference given states. She does not have duel nationality, it was her great-grandfather that was born there not her. She is not by ancestry either, as the reference given states her great-grandfather was born to Spanish parents. --Anen87 (talk) 22:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Queen Letizia of Spain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927225838/http://www.diariodenavarra.es/especiales/bodareal/novios/pagina7.aspDiariodeNavarra.es to http://www.diariodenavarra.es/especiales/bodareal/novios/pagina7.aspDiariodeNavarra.es
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060708220716/http://www.casareal.es:80/ingles/sar_letizia/index.html to http://www.casareal.es/ingles/sar_letizia/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
 Link rot affected the first before the url was archived, second is okay. Worldbruce (talk) 18:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Queen Letizia of Spain. 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:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090807055555/http://www.riag.es:80/blog/?p=60 to http://www.riag.es/blog/?p=60
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140622051105/http://www.casareal.es:80/EN/FamiliaReal/ReinaLetizia/Paginas/subhome.aspx to http://www.casareal.es/EN/FamiliaReal/ReinaLetizia/Paginas/subhome.aspx
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140622051105/http://www.casareal.es:80/EN/FamiliaReal/ReinaLetizia/Paginas/subhome.aspx to http://www.casareal.es/EN/FamiliaReal/ReinaLetizia/Paginas/subhome.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:52, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Letizia Ortiz was born in Oviedo in 1972. At the time of her birth, Spain was under the dictatorship of Francisco Franco and its official name was the Kingdom of Spain (like today, only the polity was fundamentally different and the head of state was not a monarch). Given the political upheaval and emergence of several 'Spanish' polities (Republic, dictatorship, constitutional monarchy etc.) across the twentieth century, and in the interest of historical fact and accuracy, it would be prudent to have an underlying link directing to the Francoist Spain page on her place of birth. In other words, the Spain she was born in is not constitutionally the same as the post-1975 Spain she is queen consort of today.
Some have argued that this is wrong - that historical 'time periods' should not feature in this respect. However, as a riposte to their refusal to reach consensus, I point to the Wikipedia page for Adolf Hitler. This details his place of death as 'Nazi Germany', however, this was never the official name of Germany. In fact, during the Nazi period, Germany continued to use the same official name as the Weimar Republic, the 'German Reich'. There is, therefore, inconsistency across Wikipedia's articles.
As a point of comparison, the articles of numerous historical and contemporary personalities on Wikipedia detail their places of birth as states that are no longer in existence today. The pages for Letizia's parents-in-law are an excellent example of such practice. This, I believe, is right and historically accurate. It enriches the general information about the person and provides the reader with convenient historical context. 195.147.250.224 (talk) 18:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: 195.147.250.224 has repeatedly been told to stop his crusade to change birthplace country names into made-up names. It's impossible to have the same discussion on every single article, so I will just note briefly for the record that I (and other editors) have rejected his proposed changes. --Tataral (talk) 18:33, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place of birth 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Queen Letizia of Spain. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070216024655/http://www.diariodenavarra.es/especiales/bodareal/familias/pagina6.asp to http://www.diariodenavarra.es/especiales/bodareal/familias/pagina6.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070522192128/http://www.diariodenavarra.es/especiales/bodareal/familias/pagina5.asp to http://www.diariodenavarra.es/especiales/bodareal/familias/pagina5.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141014202926/http://www.diariodenavarra.es/especiales/bodareal/novios/pagina6.asp to http://www.diariodenavarra.es/especiales/bodareal/novios/pagina6.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:40, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Should "heir presumptive" be "heiress presumptive"?  If not, why not? Paul Magnussen (talk) 15:40, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Heir presumptive is fine, since the word heir is not gender-marked. It is already clear that the heir presumptive is female since she is described as the subject's daughter and as Princess of Asturias. Surtsicna (talk) 17:25, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heir presumptive? 

message: She is undoubtedly Catholic, but I can't prove it. All the gossip columns gush about her not requiring a declaration of nullity before her Catholic marriage. The way this is possible is if she had been a baptized Catholic at the time of her first attempt at marriage. If she had been non-Catholic, then an investigation would have been required, and possibly a declaration of nullity would have been issued then. But until we find an article or book that asserts her Catholic status, no categories can apply. Elizium23 (talk) 05:57, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Being baptized a Catholic is one thing and identifying as Catholic as an adult is another. We should not label her as Catholic unless she identifies as such. Surtsicna (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , she married the King in a Catholic ceremony. Elizium23 (talk) 15:32, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: And her father-in-law married her mother-in-law in an Orthodox ceremony. So what? We cannot claim that she is Catholic without a source that says she identifies as a Catholic. Surtsicna (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Her father-in-law married her mother-in-law in a Catholic ceremony in Athens. You are apparently mistaken.161.24.4.94 (talk) 11:23, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic 

message: Should the intro to this article begin with Queen Letizia of Spain & the infobox heading be Letizia? or not. GoodDay (talk) 21:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Misogynistic? Is that the reason why you're opposing the proposed change? GoodDay (talk) 14:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not see why the article about the queen of Spain should be consistent with articles about Scandinavian queens instead of Spanish queens. Surtsicna (talk) 21:35, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The current queen consorts should be consistent with each other. GoodDay (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds a lot like recentism. Letizia of Spain has much more to do with Victoria Eugenie of Spain than with Silvia of Sweden. All that aside, there are much more important issues here than consistency: accuracy, encyclopedic wording, and decent writing about women. Surtsicna (talk) 21:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Being as this is an RFC, we'll allow others to interpret what's correct via their input. GoodDay (talk) 22:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

text:  Choose as you wish, but many sources call her Queen Letizia or just Letizia. GoodDay (talk) 12:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

text:  But, it's not consistent with other living queen consorts & sources usually call her Queen Letizia or just Letizia. GoodDay (talk) 14:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

text:  What is she called in Spain & international news? Queen Letizia, Letizia or her by her full former name. GoodDay (talk) 12:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

text:  Would you oppose changing it to simply Letizia? GoodDay (talk) 17:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't it just be her full name? ~ HAL333 17:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Why does it have to be? We don't do it for the other current consorts. Why make this one bio different? Or would you support that we use full names in the intros of all the current consorts? GoodDay (talk) 17:27, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I would support that. ~ HAL333 18:06, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll bring the suggestion up at Royal Conventions page, in the coming days. GoodDay (talk) 18:12, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

text: I think it makes more sense, from a formatting point of view, for her to be referred to as Letiza (born Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano) in line with other queen consorts, to standardize it. I also think this discussion is worthy of reopening for consensus, given the importance of the topic. It's a bit strange for her to be referred to by her maiden name first and foremost, since there is no indication it's her popular or legal name by the media.--Bettydaisies (talk) 20:13, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You're free to re-open it. GoodDay (talk) 20:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC: Intro & infobox title 

message: *No, per MOS:FULLNAME and consistency with 24 other articles about Spanish queens consort. And why should we obfuscate the subject's last name? Starting it with "Queen Letizia of Spain" forces us to have the rest of the sentence misleading (suggesting that her last name is no longer what it is), repetitive (defining Queen Letizia of Spain as queen of Spain), and/or borderline misogynistic (defining the subject as someone's wife). Starting it with the subject's full name is natural and common and allows us to define her easily and appropriately. Surtsicna (talk) 21:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Misogynistic? Is that the reason why you're opposing the proposed change? GoodDay (talk) 14:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not see why the article about the queen of Spain should be consistent with articles about Scandinavian queens instead of Spanish queens. Surtsicna (talk) 21:35, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The current queen consorts should be consistent with each other. GoodDay (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds a lot like recentism. Letizia of Spain has much more to do with Victoria Eugenie of Spain than with Silvia of Sweden. All that aside, there are much more important issues here than consistency: accuracy, encyclopedic wording, and decent writing about women. Surtsicna (talk) 21:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Being as this is an RFC, we'll allow others to interpret what's correct via their input. GoodDay (talk) 22:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

text:  Choose as you wish, but many sources call her Queen Letizia or just Letizia. GoodDay (talk) 12:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

text:  But, it's not consistent with other living queen consorts & sources usually call her Queen Letizia or just Letizia. GoodDay (talk) 14:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

text:  What is she called in Spain & international news? Queen Letizia, Letizia or her by her full former name. GoodDay (talk) 12:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

text:  Would you oppose changing it to simply Letizia? GoodDay (talk) 17:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't it just be her full name? ~ HAL333 17:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Why does it have to be? We don't do it for the other current consorts. Why make this one bio different? Or would you support that we use full names in the intros of all the current consorts? GoodDay (talk) 17:27, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I would support that. ~ HAL333 18:06, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll bring the suggestion up at Royal Conventions page, in the coming days. GoodDay (talk) 18:12, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: If the trend continues towards no? I'll have to make changes to the intros & infoboxes of all the other current consort bios. See the consorts in Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Monaco, etc. GoodDay (talk) 14:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it makes more sense, from a formatting point of view, for her to be referred to as Letiza (born Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano) in line with other queen consorts, to standardize it. I also think this discussion is worthy of reopening for consensus, given the importance of the topic. It's a bit strange for her to be referred to by her maiden name first and foremost, since there is no indication it's her popular or legal name by the media.--Bettydaisies (talk) 20:13, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You're free to re-open it. GoodDay (talk) 20:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: The opening sentence of the article is wrong as Queen Letizia is not the "Queen of Spain". Under Royal Decree 1368/1987, which regulates the titles of the Spanish RF, "Queen of Spain" is a title reserved for reigning queens only. I don't understand why the sentence is not simply changed to "Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano is the queen consort of Spain as the wife of King Felipe VI". Note that "queen consort" in the proposed sentence is not a legal title (Letizia's only legal title in Spain is "Queen"), but rather a generic qualifier for her position in English (like saying that Charles, Prince of Wales, is the "heir apparent" to the thrones of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth realms). 2804:14C:165:8EC3:C0FA:D446:67A:7BB (talk) 11:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone still cares, that is not true. The wife of the king of Spain is and has always been the queen of Spain. Surtsicna (talk) 16:23, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

text: We have it linked to the consorts page & mention in the infobox. My only problem with the lead, is that it's not Letizia. GoodDay (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Opening Sentence is wrong

message: Great grandparent was a Peninsulares / Criollo people, a term used in Spanish colonial times in the Philippines, for pure white Spaniards born in their colony of the Philippines.
This means her great grandmother was a "White Filipina" born to pure White Spanish parents.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.141.129.201 (talk) 12:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Great Grandmother a Peninsulares / Criollo Filipino