Talk:Queen Victoria/Surname

message: * This genealogical site lists Edward VII under the surname Wettin. 
* So does pjcj.sytes.net/cgi-bin/gedcom.cgi?op=indi&gedcom=royal92&indi=I4 this one. 
* And this one.
* And This research by Margaret Odrowaz-Sypniewska, a genealogist, says the same. 
* This reference to Princess Beatrice Mary Victoria Teodora Wettin (1857-1944), youngest daughter of Queen Victoria. 
* This geneaological tree also uses Wettin. 
* This geneaological listing of all of Queen Victoria's children as possessing the surname Wettin. 
* And this. 
* The century-old Clann Donald of Edinburgh, also calls Edward VII Wettin.
----
::Genealogical sites are worthless for this kind of thing.  You are citing "references" that give wholly inaccurates names to these people, and which you yourself would dismiss if somebody was arguing that these sites prove that Princess Beatrice's article should be moved to Beatrice Wettin.  Here, let me cite some genealogical sources that don't mention Wettin as a surname for Edward VII:
::*The excellent genealogics site.
::*The University of Erlangen's WWperson database
::These are probably the two best genealogical sources on the internet, and they don't back you up.  Your sources are falling into the error of believing that everybody must have a surname, and thus endeavouring to discover what the surname of Britain's Saxe-Coburg monarchs was.  This does not mean that this was their actual name in any sense at all. john k 07:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually they are not. Your argument is as usual based on saying nobody says this and when it is proved that they do, saying my preferred sites don't. Don't be so presumptious as to that everyone is making a mistake and you aren't. Geneaologists only use validly existing surnames. They don't make them up. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 22:14, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Genealogists on the internet only use validly existing surnames?  On what basis do you make this claim?  On what basis do these sites you are quoting have any authority whatsoever?  If you can show me a known genealogical reference source, e.g. Burke's, or the Gotha, which shows them using Wettin or Guelph as a surname, that is one thing.  A bunch of amateurs on the internet are utterly worthless.  john k 23:08, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Genealogists

message: The Columbia encyclopædia  and Encyclopædia Brittanica  both link Wettins to the British crown. The former speaks of Wettins reigning in Britain while the latter states that Prince Albert was a Wettin.
----
:That doesn't mean their name was Wettin. john k 07:28, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Of course not. It means there horse was called Wettin. Don't be ridiculous. You are grasping at straws at this stage to justify your deletion of independently verified information. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 22:34, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I had not realized that their horse was called Wettin, nor am I certain how this is indicated by the articles cited.  That their house was called Wettin is not something which I deny. john k 23:35, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Encyclopædias

message: The Sunday Times on 16 January 2005 wrote of how 
:A bit of a mouthful, Saxe-Coburg-Gotha turned out not to be Albert's real surname, which was Wettin, the name of another aristocratic German dynasty. It was only in 1917 that George V, worried by the anti-German feeling caused by the first world war, ordered the royal family to scrap Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and Wettin for Windsor. 
America's PBS also speaks of Prince Albert Edward Wettin (1841-1910)
----
:The mainstream press is a terrible source for these kind of things.  Wettin, for instance, is not "another aristocratic German dynasty" than Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, as this quote appears to suggest.  The Saxe-Coburg-Gotha line is a line of the Ernestine line of the Wettin house.  And Prince Albert Ernest Wettin?  This is ignorant nonsense. john k 07:29, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't say they were infallible. They are simply yet another source to debunk your theory that no-one ever said they were called Wettin, which is the justification you used to remove the information. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 22:36, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not say that nobody has ever said they were called Wettin.  You have certainly demonstrated well enough that various people have said that their surname is Wettin.  But nobody actually calls them Wettin, in the sense of it ever having actually functioned as a surname in the way that surnames usually function. john k 23:36, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Media coverage