Talk:Prince Andrew, Duke of York

message: Andrew’s mother was Queen Elizabeth, who’s father was King George VI. So how is Andrew not a descendant of the king? 2600:8806:F48:1D00:3041:26B6:3CEE:E22E (talk) 22:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a descendant of the current king, Charles III. --  Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 03:06, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a descendant of the King? 

message: That title, as well as all of his military titles was stripped from him by his mother, Queen Elizabeth in 2022. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:2221:f500:818f:a05f:f164:f32c (talk • contribs) 
:No, he retains the peerage. DrKay (talk) 21:33, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: He's still the Duke of York. GoodDay (talk) 01:33, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Incorrectly Claims he was Duke of York 

message: Epstein was convicted of sex trafficking, not “convinced” 220.236.14.170 (talk) 22:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:13, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2022 

message: I would like to add the recent heckling incident at the queens private funeral in Edinburgh where said heckler said "Andrew, you sick old man", i believe this would go with information about Prince Andrews Sexual abuse allegations, . Wikieditor726 (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The second thing that the editor is referring to is an amateur video of Andrew that's circulating on social media. It has not been picked up by any reliable sources as far as I can tell and accordingly shouldn't be covered here. Aoi (青い) (talk) 12:37, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: On further reflection, the second part of the request likely violates BLP due to its lack of reliable sourcing, so I've redacted it. Aoi (青い) (talk) 12:42, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2022 

message: While sourced, the list of ranks is puzzling.  His promotion to captain was "honorary" (as explicitly stated in the Gazette), but subsequent ones to rear- and vice-admiral weren't?  Also, we're relying almost entirely on primary sources here, which isn't ideal.  Are there additional secondary sources that could be used to shed a little light on this? 109.255.211.6 (talk) 01:59, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The last time he officially wore military uniforms, they were (not sure) the ranks of Vice Admiral (Navy), Lieutenant General (Army) & Air Marshall (Air Force). I believe his sister Anne, holds the ranks of Admiral (Navy), General (Army) & Air Chief Marshall (Air Force), but not certain. GoodDay (talk) 03:11, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I imagine we can conclude Anne's ranks are indeed honorary, having never served in any of those, but in the cases of Andrew, having served as a commander, then been promoted to explicitly-honorary captainty, and then to a not described as honorary rear-admiralty...  As I say, a good secondary source to provide interpretation would be very useful.  109.255.211.6 (talk) 02:49, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Honorary" Captain? 

message: The UK media consistently expect Andrew to sink into the background after the Queen's funeral.  Spencer Kuvin who represented many Epstein victims thinks Andrew will try and use his public appearances at the funeral and other events to rehabilitate himself.  Kuvin should know.  
*Do UK media understand things better than the Americans?
*Alternatively do Americans know things that pro-royalist UK media haven't told us?
See Jeffrey Epstein victims angered by Prince Andrew’s ‘public rehabilitation’ at Queen’s funeral events The Independent Proxima Centauri (talk) 12:55, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: So some of the UK media are pro-royalist but want him "to sink into the background"? Any sources that might support this suggestion? Not to mention that the source you have cited (The Independent) is a UK-based newspaper reporting on the issue, so no, the American media don't necessarily know better. Meanwhile, it's better to avoid adding speculative statements regarding Andrew's future per WP:CRYSTAL. Additionally, the quotes taken from sources have to be kept to a minimum. We neither want to copy paste a big chunk of a copyrighted article into this page, nor do we want to give undue prominence to third opinions. This is a WP:BLP and the subject has not been charged with any crimes in a court of law. Keivan.fTalk 14:11, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andrew's public role at the Queen's funeral events 

message: We learn in this article that Andrew wore a uniform this week but we're not told who authorized this. Charles needs to be named. Rutsq (talk) 00:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if you can find a reliable source to support this.  British tabloids and reasonable inference (which both agree with you) aren't sufficient.  I think there may be a quote via a "royal source" and the Telegraph, but I haven't seen it first hand.  109.255.211.6 (talk) 02:55, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  uniform  

message: This article is focused heavily on the allegations of sexual abuse against Andrew and the related lawsuit, but while I understand why this is the case given it's extensive coverage for the last few years, I think that the heavily detailed information about the allegations & lawsuit could be split into a separate article (called something along the lines of Prince Andrew sexual assault allegations) to talk exclusively about the allegations and lawsuit. This would allow this article to focus on Andrew's overall life (with summarised mentions of the allegations & lawsuit) as opposed to focusing heavily on a specific part of it. 88.108.44.8 (talk) 20:27, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The lawsuit is covered in Virginia Giuffre v. Prince Andrew. Dimadick (talk) 21:40, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should there be a separate article for the allegations of sexual abuse? 

message: He’s currently listed as Prince Andrew, Duke of York Harry is listed as HRH the Duke of Sussex. Surely both Andrew Harry and Megan should be individually described in similar terms?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.28.194.217 (talk • contribs) 
:Can you clarify and contextualise what you mean by 'listed as'?  And why do you think similar terms should necessarily be used?  109.255.211.6 (talk) 01:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Andrew, Harry & Meghan all use the HRH bit. GoodDay (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely rather they have all 'have' "the HRH" bit, but none of them 'choose to' -- or in effect, are allowed to -- use it?  109.255.211.6 (talk) 01:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Titles and styles 

message: I noticed there was a little minor edit warring several months' back regarding the inclusion of the footnote about Paul Page's prior conviction for fraud. As such I wanted to explain why I think it's best left out instead.
First of all, I understand that the principal argument for its inclusion is to call his credibility into question, since that is precisely what both sources attempt to do. However, I feel that they do a poor job at this. The fact that the some of his allegations are unsubstantiated in and of itself should be enough to be able to say just that: some of his allegations are unsubstantiated. But instead they go the extra mile by insinuating that his allegations are not to be taken at face value anyway because of his prior conviction for fraud, which to me seems like flawed logic and just so unnecessary in the first place. By mentioning his prior conviction in the footnote the article applies this same flawed logic. What's more, it seems completely off-topic as well as WP:UNDUE.
In short, if there's a desire to mention that Page's allegations are mostly unsubstantiated then I would suggest we say just that and no more. I see no reason why this can't be said in prose instead of in a footnote. (Do include the sources again if you do!) Jay D. Easy (t) 21:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest, it does affect my perception of him as a character. I'm not saying anyone who has ever been accused of something is necessarily a liar, but someone who has been specifically accused of 'fraud' is usually not trustworthy. Per your suggestion, I moved the info from footnote to prose. Keivan.fTalk 07:48, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paul Page footnote 

message: In England, his title is “HRH the Duke of York” but in Scotland, his title is “HRH the Earl of Inverness”. The page’s “Titles, styles, honours and arms” section should probably be edited to include his Scottish title 2A00:23C4:37A4:9D01:5CD2:AA08:6E38:D2F5 (talk) 10:36, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just a subsidiary title not usually used anywhere: "Duke of York thanks public as Princess Eugenie sheds a tear reading tributes outside Balmoral", The Scotsman, 10 Sept. 2022, published in Edinburgh. But, in any event, it's already mentioned with a comment that on "rare occasions" it's used in Scotland. DeCausa (talk) 12:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scottish title 

message: I have a concern about the wording, "The lawsuit was filed under New York's Child Victims Act, legislation extending the statute of limitations where the plaintiff had been under 18 at the time, 17 in Giuffre's case.
The Act does not provide the basis of an action, but merely extends the limitation period under which it can be made. It "[a]mends prospectively the statute of limitations in civil actions alleging conduct which would constitute a sexual offense against a child under the age of 18....up until the victim reaches 55 years of age."
Can we change "was filed under" to "was allowed under?" TFD (talk) 05:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that's better. Perhaps "was made possible by the passage of New York's Child Victims Act.." etc. Fred Zepelin (talk) 17:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Child Victims Act 

message: He is no longer a prince. 110.20.75.13 (talk) 01:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: He was stripped of many of his military titles and no longer uses the style "royal highness," but remains a prince; reliable sources continue to refer to him as "Prince Andrew."  Aoi (青い) (talk) 01:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2023 

message: I think signature of Andrew should be changed to SVG format.
The link is Signature_of_Prince_Andrew,_Duke_of_York.svg  Tipinen (talk) 11:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I see the advantage of changing it to svg in this situation. Could you explain why that would be better? Tristario (talk) 23:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: actually I think svg does look better, so I'll change it to that Tristario (talk) 02:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2023 

message: There is an RfC on Talk:Charles III#RfC: Inclusion of "Agnatic house" which may relate to this article. Feel free to contribute. Estar8806 (talk) 03:07, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC on Charles III 

message: On 6 May 2023, at the Coronation of Charles III and Camilla, Prince Andrew was booed by members of the public as he was driven down The Mall in a state car: . I think this should be added. 86.186.37.253 (talk) 11:25, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Further source: . Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:59, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

text: Regardless of any crowd reaction, his attendance at the ceremony needs to be noted. Is the Royal seating plan, in the Abbey, in the public domain? 205.239.40.3 (talk) 13:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

text: Do we need to include every time that Prince Andrew gets booed throughout this biography? Biographies aren't generally for trivial things like this, see WP:BLP Tristario (talk) 00:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never heard Andrew being booed throughout this biography, but it might be an option in Wikipedia:Spoken articles? 205.239.40.3 (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Coronation of Charles III and Camilla]] 

message: Is this person still officially the Duke of York? 2A01:CB15:821A:1D00:E0EA:E7CD:CD46:22CF (talk) 10:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:09, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2023 

message: The last sentence under the sub-title "Finances & Debt" includes a reference to Mr. Gleave's search for 'Finding yogurt production.' It has come to our attention that this information is inaccurate and misleading, as it was reported based on a statement from a convicted fraudster.
To maintain the accuracy and integrity of the article, we kindly request the immediate removal of the name ' Adrian Gleave' from the mentioned sentence.
(Other new details revealed about the case also include the fact that Prince Andrew received “half” of a £100,000 sum which Mr Turk claimed was a payment to businessman Adrian Gleave, 52, to fund a search for “finding yoghurt production facilities in America”.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zento21 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Your quote in brackets is from The Daily Telegraph, and has not been retracted by the paper. The article content is therefore supported by the citation. I can find no evidence that the report is based on a statement from a convicted fraudster. The report is based on a statement from someone who is being sued in civil court for fraud. There is no outcome as yet, nor will there be any conviction as the case is a civil one not a criminal one. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finances & Debt 

message: I found a small spelling mistake:
Under "Allegations of sexual abuse" > "Jeffrey Epstein and related associations" >
In the sixth paragraph, change "Tuan "John" Alessi, who was..." to "Juan "John" Alessi, who was..."
The butler's name is Juan, not Tuan. Fleinflein (talk) 19:32, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2024 

message: A discussion is going on at the Commons concerning the copyright status of several coats of arms that are in use on pages related to British royalty. Please feel free to share your comments and input at :commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Coat of arms of Queen Camilla.svg. Thanks. Keivan.fTalk 18:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coats of arms and copyright