Talk:Squidgygate

message: A reference for this would be useful for the main Diana page (and would improve this page too). 82.40.183.118 14:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gilbey affair admitted by Diana? 

message: Most of this section is irrelevant to the topic, and should be dropped. Moreover, it assumes that the reader happens to know the date of Diana's death of the top of their heads! I suggest this be trimmed to no more than a single sentence. — Matt Crypto 09:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Squidgygate II?"

message: It seemed a bit excessive to me but since somebody put the  tag on the aside noting that thee Princess' adultery amounted to High treason I added a quotation from the relevant act. Although it is conventional to refer simply to the "Treason Act 1351" the full citation (25th year of the reign of Edward II, 2nd etc...)is usually given. Short titles didn't come in until the reign of Elizabeth II. Stroika 12:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Judging strictly by the quote provided, neither party technically engaged in treason, since that would require "violation" of the Princess of Wales, when in fact the relationship was consensual.  Furthermore, the act specifies only the male as engaging in treason in such cases.  It might be good either to change the introduction accordingly or provide a different quote that would more accurately defend the assertion being made. -202.63.55.96 10:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually consent is irrelevant. This is not the modern law of rape. Adultery does count as treason. Cf. the death of Anne Boleyn. Stroika 02:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Stroika has twice added the statement that Diana "admitted" to an affair with Gilbey.  There is no support for this statement.  If it is replaced, it must be accompanied by a citation. Deb 18:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treason reference 

message: Some sections of the article are very poorly written, with very short one-sentence paragraphs. Can somebody with good writing skills have a look into this and fix it? I don't think that just lumpling some of these one-sentence paragraphs together to form bigger ones will work well. -xDCDx 13:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's even more of a mess now, with long irreverent sections about the media reaction to Diana's death. Needs a ruthless cull Ariehkovler (talk) 18:43, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article poorly written 

message: The section titled "Surveillance of Diana after Squidgygate" quotes a FOI request by an organisation called APB News Online: I can find no references to such an organisation online, except for blogs quoting this WP article. In addition, the footnote links to a placeholder page. As this is the only quoted source for some quite significant details, I'm minded to delete the relevant paragraphs unless someone can come up with a current source for the FOI request ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 11:21, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody's objected, so I've been bold. My edit can be reverted if anyone can shed light on the mysterious APB News ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 21:38, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  APB News Online? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Squidgygate. 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/20050909143957/http://www.crew-green.com/Diana.htm to http://www.crew-green.com/Diana.htm
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) 07:41, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified