Talk:Elizabeth II/Archive 6

message: I read: In Scotland the Church of Scotland (with a Presbyterian system of church government) is recognised in law as the "national church" in which the Queen is an ordinary member. and I wonder: does the Queen ever attend an Anglican church in Scotland and is her status as an ordinary member of the Church of Scotland one that may be assumed by any member of the Church of England? Laurel Bush 12:18, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The British monarch (when in Scotland) is simply a member of the Church (she is not, as in England, its "Supreme Governor"). The monarch’s coronation oath includes a promise to "defend the security" of the Church of Scotland. She is formally represented at the annual General Assembly by a Lord High Commissioner (unless she chooses to attend in person). The role is purely formal." 
But surely this is contradictory. If she is an ordinary member of the Church, in what capacity is she represented at the annual General Assembly by a Lord High Commissioner? Adam 05:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Adam, have you read the long debate on this topic, above (Order of Mention of Commonwealth Realms)?  JackofOz 09:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion 

message: My one and only question is: why is the UK singled out? --gbambino 21:39, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "...Including the United Kingdom." 

message: All.  Simply put, Wikipedia is not British focused.  This article is.  The coins for instance - could someone add other Commonwealth realm coins?  Also, the PMs should be all there.  --GeLuxe 22:20, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics|Response to RfC]] 

message: The list should be either:
#Australia
#Canada
#Great Britain and Northern Ireland
#New Zealand
Or it should be:
#Commonwealth of Australia
#Dominion of Canada
#Dominion of New Zealand
#United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The point being that the terms Commonwealth, Dominion, and United Kingdom are descriptive modifiers of the actual proper noun that describes the country. And yes, I know that "dominion" has gone out of fashion, but has it officially been dropped? If so, then we have a third potential list:
#Canada
#Commonwealth of Australia
#New Zealand
#United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
And doesn't New Zealand have an official Maori name or something anyway? TharkunColl 00:40, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would make the most sense to move it to Elizabeth II of the Commonwealth.  -Arctic.gnome 11:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: note.  New Zealand's full name is New Zealand.  It is not the Dominion of New Zealand (that was dropped in 1947). --GeLuxe 22:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inconsistent alphabetising of countries

message: Her personal name is given as Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor, but surely this is wrong. Upon marrage to Philip Mountbatten she hyphenated her name as Windsor-Mountbatten. This is the surname Charles used when he signed his marriage certificate (or was it Mountbatten-Windsor?). Note: The dynastic name is still Windsor, and will remain so under Charles - this was determined early in her reign under pressure from Churchill, who disliked the Mountbattens. But I'm referring to her actual, personal name. TharkunColl 12:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To my understanding, her children adopted the hyphen as a courtesy to their father.  Unless I'm mistaken, they're still Windsors in the strictest sense. Durova 17:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: To my knowledge, the hyphenated version is not a courtesy to Philip but to Elizabeth. Normally, the children would all be simply Mountbattens. As far as I know, Charles retains Windsor, while his younger siblings are Windsor-Mountbattens (or is it Mountbatten-Windsor?). Str1977 22:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: "[...] The Queen is the fourth Sovereign of the House of Windsor (adopted as the Royal Family's official name in 1917), but she does not have a surname as such. In 1960, The Queen declared  that those of her descendants not entitled to the style of Royal Highness, and female descendants who married, would in future use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor (before their marriage, The Duke of Edinburgh was known as Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten). This decision linked the surname of her husband with their descendants, without changing the name of the royal house."
Hope this helps.  (LOL)  Noisy | Talk 17:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What's the queen's surname?

message: The queen also succeeded to the throne of South Africa in 1952. Why is that not mentioned? I've just added it anyway. Whereas the first paragraph describes her current titles, the second refers to what she inherited in 1952, therefore South Africa must be included for the sake of consistency. TharkunColl 12:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: South Africa

message: Concerning the 3 people who have been known to touch the Queen well I remember watching something on ITV1 called 'It Shouldn't Happen to a Royal Reporter' and there was a clip of a Black woman in Belize embracing the Queen. She also fed her some kind of rat. 
:Are you sure it wasn't Princess Margaret with a suntan? Fishhead64 05:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personal attack!  Well played!  -- Samir ∙ TC   07:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Personality and image

message: The "if she lives until" section should be removed. WP:NOT a crystal ball. - Sikon 07:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should she be reigning... 

message: I want to point out how the article states she has "farted" 54 times... or something to that effect. I brought this article to attention because I'm sure there is supposed to be something else there. This is CLEARLY vandalism. 
.68.72.166.118 20:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you just happened to visit the page five minutes after it was vandalised - sorry about that. It's been cleaned up now (although two of us reverted at the same time, myself to a former version, and I'm not sure whether that edit that I missed was useful). Maybe someone more familiar with the article could take a look? Cormaggio @ 20:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  She farted 

message: She is related to all ruling monarchs of Europe... according to the article!
Where is the proof? Is she related to the royal family of Luxembourg and Liechenstein? Maltesedog
*According to the Line of succession to the British Throne, Henri, Grand Duke of Luxembourg would be placed somewhere around 1120 (give or take) if he were not Catholic.  He is in the line through his mother, Princess Josephine-Charlotte of Belgium (her brother Albert II of Belgium would be around 1100 (+/-).   Not sure about Liechtenstein, although one of Henri's sisters married into the princely family of Liechtenstein. Prsgoddess187 13:52, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the static succession list, there are Liechtenstein's at about the 1120th mark (Henri's sister's children) and then there are more at approx. 500 intervals from there until about 4400 (although they're not included for being Catholic). I don't think HM is related to Hans-Adam and if she is, it's by marriage only - the Liechs on the static list must be a lesser line of the family or something? Craigy (talk) 13:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Once removed refers to generations. So your cousin once removed is the child of your first cousin. See the cousin chart for more details. Astrotrain 19:41, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Why don't you just change it to, "most, if not all" if you're really not sure? --Q Canuck 20:35, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: ALL current European royal families and most former European royal families are descended from Prince Johann Willem Friso of Orange-Nassau, Stadtholder of the Netherlands (b. 1687). That being a fact, Her Majesty is related to all reigning royal families. Charles 01:11, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Related to all royal families?