Talk:Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Citations needed

It is not sufficient that knowledgeable editors know material in this article to be correct. (Time will come when you are gone, and "Lor' help us" if the right patterns of editing are not in place by that time.) Factual material that is not common knowledge—and in an English encyclopedia whose readership is primarily American, none of this is common knowledge—must be traceable to a reliable source, as indicated by an inline citation (per WP:VERIFY, letter and spirit). There are entire paragraphs and entire endnotes in this article that violate WP:VERIFY and therefore constitute original editorial scholarship (and so also violate WP:OR). And note, one is not freed from claim of plagiarism by paraphrase of material taken without attribution; honest scholarly writing implies that sources of all facts and ideas be attributed, or it is indeed plagiarism. Please, scan the article for any unsourced factual statements, and source them. (Do this thoroughly, or the encyclopedia remains corrupt, only more so, because the flaws in intellect and integrity—plagiarised bits—have become well hidden.) In the mean time, the article needs to bear the {{refimprove}} tag. 73.211.138.148 (talk) 18:40, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Moving Queen mother to Queen mother (title)

There is a discussion in progress at Talk:Queen mother, about moving Queen mother to Queen mother (title) for those who wish to comment.--Nevé–selbert 17:50, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Arms as Duchess of York

Do we know of her armorial bearings for the period 1923-36? I assume it would be [of Prince Albert, Duke of York] impaled with her father's, but I can't find proof. Robin S. Taylor (talk) 00:46, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Precedence after death of Queen Mary

The page states "On the death of Queen Mary in 1953 and with the former King Edward VIII living abroad, Elizabeth became the senior member of the British Royal Family and assumed a position as family matriarch."

According to the Orders of precedence in the United Kingdom the monarch is the head of the Royal Family, regardless of gender and has precedence over the Queen Dowager or as was the case when Queen Elizabeth II ascended to the throne, the Queens Dowager!

This whole paragraph reads as a fanciful imaginary view of how it might have been. How do we know she was matriarchal? and we certainly know she was only senior in her years and not in terms of precedence within the family.

Can we edit this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickPMiller (talk • contribs) 00:31, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

She was the most senior after the Queen in terms of precedence. Matriarch is a term often applied to her: [1][2][3]. DrKay (talk) 09:13, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

I accept that in external commentary she was perceived to be in a matriarchal role, so I think it is fine to say that it is a term often applied to her but these are not first hand sources with any special access to say that is how it was. Maybe it was, seems quite likely, but I am a strong believer in being clear about that sort of thing. Our future generations need to find it easy to see what was first hand and what was not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickPMiller (talk • contribs) 20:10, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

She was senior in terms of lovegety to her title, just as Queen Mary was the senior member of the Royal Family after the death of her husband. With the death of the Queen Mother, the Queen is now the senior royal female, while holding greater rank as Sovereign. The Duke of Gloucester was not senior to the Queen Mother because he was ranked as a royal duke. If the Queen somehow predeceased the Duke of Edinburgh, he will be the senior member of the Family as a monarch's consort, even if his son outranks him as Sovereign. When the senior royal dies at a palace, the banner of the next most senior royal is raised (ie when George VI died, the Queen Mother's flag was raised at Buckingham Palace as she was the next most senior member of the Family living there; the new Queen was still resident at Clarence House). Get it yet? 98.10.165.90 (talk) 19:52, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Can we change the page to say "On the death of Queen Mary in 1953 and with the former King Edward VIII living abroad, Elizabeth became the most senior member of the Royal Family after the sovereign...". This would be factually correct and would not be misleading as to the nature of who was is at the top of the Royal Family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickPMiller (talk • contribs) 20:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2015

There is nothing on this page regarding Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother's contribution to charity. She was a patron of the charity Queen Elizabeth's Foundation for Disabled People which is still running and still uses her name. She visited the charity eight times and attended more events to support the charity. This was a significant part of the Queen Mother's life and I feel it should be honoured. I have a lot of original photographs of her visits ranging from 1935 to 1998, please contact me at rachael.stamper@qef.org.uk and I would be happpy to share these photographs and prepare a paragraph about her time with QEF. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RachaelStamper (talk • contribs) 11:41, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Date/place of birth

I loved the old gal but The Queen Mother (Chapter: "The Most Wanted Angel", pp. 11-20, written by Lady Colin Campbell (I would trust nothing from the vile, repugnant Kitty Kelley) does make an extremely persuasive claim that Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was indeed born at St Paul's Walden Bury but on 3 August, not 4 August to the 13th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne and a cook at St Paul's Walden Bury, Marguerite Rodiere, because Lady Glamis (the Earl's wife), having born eight children already, suffered from precarious health, particularly following the death of her daughter, Violet, and was told by doctors not to bear any more children. Should we add a footnote regarding this? Quis separabit? 19:47, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

The current footnote is more than enough to cover such a ridiculous suggestion. DrKay (talk) 20:00, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

I see a reference to the above was made. I tweaked and expanded same but not too dramatically. Quis separabit? 20:00, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@DrKay -- stop engaging in censorship and let's discuss the matter calmly here. Quis separabit? 20:07, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

I haven't censored anything. You're the one removing sourced content. DrKay (talk) 20:09, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Content from bottom feeder Kitty Kelley and outlandish sites of birth that are geographically impossible given where her birth was registered and what that very same year's census indicated and the 1980 announcement from Clarence House!!! Quis separabit? 20:23, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Her birth was registered 6 weeks after her birth. This is well-documented and indeed is often used by biographers as evidence for subterfuge (even though such delays were not in fact uncommon). We can't select one source over another. The birthplace is uncertain and there is nothing wrong with the article using multiple sources or giving multiple potential locations, as the sources do. DrKay (talk) 20:27, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Fine, but then please don't delete my sourced info, however distasteful you may find it. And, btw, why would they have told the census taker(s) the following year (1901) that she was born in St Paul's Walden Bury? Just curious. Quis separabit? 20:35, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

I reiterate: I have not removed sourced information. You did: [4][5] DrKay (talk) 20:45, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. 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/20120921144532/http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/the-collectors/queen-elizabeth to http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/the-collectors/queen-elizabeth

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:14, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. 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/20090429231517/http://www.cbc.ca/news/obit/queenmother to http://www.cbc.ca/news/obit/queenmother

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:37, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Philip de László - Elizabeth Angela Marguerite Bowes-Lyon 1925.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 11:52, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2018

Marguerite Rodiere should be noted as the PROBABLE mother of Elizabeth Angela MARGUERITE 99.21.186.200 (talk) 17:26, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. See also Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother#cite_note-campbell-10. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 17:36, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

not most dangerous

The Hitler quote about her being "the most dangerous woman in Europe" never happened.

The Churchill website linked to for that quote has no source to back it up and there are no contemporary sources for it.

The official biography by William Shawcross says the story is apocryphal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:777C:C750:5507:7B1:EF55:16EE (talk) 16:51, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

No criticism?

I do not believe it is constructive to just remove the entire section on "criticism" since that makes us portray this person as practically faultless, which smacks of censorship, and is misleading to a reader. If there should be no such special section (as per the edit summary given), then the well-sourced material should be moved elsewhere in the article, not just deleted. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:35, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

It hasn't been deleted, just restored to where it was originally, as explained in the edit summary. DrKay (talk) 20:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I checked that edit sloppily. Thanks. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:49, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Titles and styles

@Celia Homeford: Could you explain how it contradicts article text? Keivan.f^Talk 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

The article says that she became known as Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother "shortly after George VI's death", not upon his death (6 February 1952). Surtsicna (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

@DrKay: Then shouldn't we somehow show that in 1952 she was known merely as Her Majesty The Queen Mother for a short period of time? At least in the "Titles and styles" section? Keivan.f^Talk 18:30, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm really surprised by that Gazette article. It's not only wrong, it's also badly written. In the second paragraph it says "Sir Claude George Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne" but we never use the title "Sir" for an earl. It says they "settled down in White Lodge, behind Buckingham Palace" but White Lodge is in Richmond Park, nowhere near Buckingham Palace. It says "Elizabeth ascended the throne 4 months later. From that moment on, she was known as the Queen Mother." This confuses the two Elizabeths and gets the date of accession incorrect. It's made me lose respect for the Gazette as a source. Consequently, I no longer think we should use it as a source for titles and styles. Therefore, I'm against using it as a source for the dates of changes in her titles and styles. DrKay (talk) 20:15, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

The London Times was calling her the "Queen Mother" on the day after her husband died so really a very short "shortly" less than 24 hours after his death. MilborneOne (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

That's not the issue though is it? As I said,[6] it's the "Queen Elizabeth" bit at the front. DrKay (talk) 20:50, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Understood but as far as I can see the Times just calls her the Queen Mother with no mention of the Elizabeth bit. MilborneOne (talk) 12:17, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Ancestry

"Lady Colin Campbell" is a totally discredited gossip with no credible links to the Royal Family whatsoever. Somebody like that oughtn't to appear as a source in any publication with encyclopeadal aspirations.

--88.68.41.88 (talk) 10:04, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

And she doesn't. Surtsicna (talk) 10:25, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Capitalisation of Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother

For the capitalisation of The in this article three issues of The London Gazette are mentioned as sources. Those of the 3rd of August 2000 and the 5th of August write "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother", but that of the 16th of June 2003 writes "Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother". Also, note that British law often (but not always) spells "Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother" (Regency Act, Civil List Act), that the Encyclopædia Britannica writes "she became known officially as Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother", and that William Shawcross's official biography of her is quoted by major British newspapers as well as his publisher as Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, for instance. So, the uppercase T may not be necessarily required, and to me as a Dutchman a capital T looks like American spelling or is at least very formal. ErikvanB (talk) 14:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Which Prince of Wales?

Since Charles and David both played major roles in her lifetime, the clause "a mixed-race secretary who accused members of the Prince of Wales's Household of racial abuse," should be disambiguated.

I suggest, "a mixed-race secretary who accused members of Prince Charles's household of racial abuse."

The Ref 156 makes it clear that Prince Charles is the Prince of Wales in question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.243.182.59 (talk) 09:28, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Respectfully, I persist. Why shouldn't the article itself clarify the identity of the Prince of Wales in question? Some readers may assume the reference is to David, especially since all references to the Prince of Wales in the article so far have been to David. A reader should not have to take the extra step of consulting a reference to clarify ambiguity in an article. Besides my proposed edit not only clarifies but shortens the sentence. Should readers feel the need to consult every reference in the article to be sure they've "gotten it"?

Dr. Kathleen Weber — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.60.191.124 (talk) 19:22, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2020

Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother is a descendant of the Scottish Royal House as her 14th male-line great grandfather's(Sir John Lyon of Glamis) mother's(Lady Jean Stewart) father was Robert II of Scotland , a grandfather of James I of Scotland , a husband of Joan Beufort, Queen of Scots, a male-line descendant of Edward III of England and Robert II was a great-great-great grandfather of James IV of Scotland and his wife was Margret Tudor, a daughter of Henry VII of England . Robert II was a great-great-great-great grandfather of James V of Scotland and he was a father of Mary, Queen of Scots. Mary's son was James I of England and James VI of Scotland when he was the only heir to the throne and the closest relatives. Queen Elizabeth II along with her father and their family were descendants of James I of England and James VI of Scotland so even though you think The Queen's mother was queen consort she was a long distant cosuin of her husband. So she is a royal. Mommyyyyyyy (talk) 12:59, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done No source provided and seems trivial. DrKay (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Move to Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon

Every Queen consort is known by their birth names (Mary of Teck, Alexandra of Denmark, Catherine of Braganza), so why isn’t Queen Elizabeth known as Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon? Royal Braganza (talk) 17:37, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Because if you look at the bibliography, almost all the books written about her call her "The Queen Mother". StAnselm (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

I still think the name of this page should be changed to Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon. The fact that it’s “The Queen Mother” sort of gives her less importance over the other queens! Royal Braganza (talk) 16:36, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

I also think that Page title should be changed to her maiden name, previous Queens consorts also named like that even though some of them popularly known as Queen "First Name".
Chamika1990 (talk) 08:15, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@Chamika1990: @Royal Braganza: Have you considered starting a move discussion? Keivan.f^Talk 09:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Broken Link

1. Queen of the United Kingdom? It seems to me there's a broken link on this page. If I hover over the link to 'Queen of the United Kingdom' in the first sentence I get a glimpse of the beginning of the article titled 'List of Royal Consorts' and a picture of a young Prince Albert, wife of Queen Victoria. If I then click on that link it does indeed bring my browser to 'List of Royal Consorts'.

Well, I was going to include a screen shot but I don't own the copyright. Just hover over the link to 'Queen of the United Kingdom' and you'll see the same thing.

I have no idea how to change a link and I'd like to think ordinary readers aren't permitted to change links without changing the words of the link that appear in the article.

If this indeed is an error, could someone please fix the problem?

I'm using Windows 10 fully up to date and I notice the problem with both Firefox version 87 (up to date) and with Edge version 89.0.774.68.

thanks, Bmwbrucknerfan (talk) 16:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

There's no fault. It's supposed to do that. DrKay (talk) 16:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm missing something because I thought it was straightforward. I expected the link to take me to the article about the current queen of the UK. That would now be Queen Elizabeth II, a monarch. Instead it took me to the article "List of British royal consorts". Consorts aren't monarchs. A queen might be a monarch or a consort but it's not a man. I'll assume for purposes of this comment 'man' retains its long term meaning of people born male and 'consorts' includes men and women. Articles about queens shouldn't include men.Bmwbrucknerfan (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

The article about the current queen of the UK is available at Elizabeth II. The list of British sovereigns rulers can be found at List of British monarchs. I believe the "Queen of the United Kingdom" link was phrased as such since her title was merely Queen, not Queen consort, but the issue has now been remedied. The page Category:Queens regnant in the British Isles, is the only section where exclusively female monarchs are listed, I think.--Bettydaisies (talk) 03:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 April 2021

Between 112 and 113 change “they were severely handicapped” to “they had severe learning disabilities” due to the term handicapped being seen as offensive to people with learning disabilities as it implies begging ie cap in hand 77.99.188.37 (talk) 11:22, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

 Done Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Elizabeth Angela Marguerite Bowes-Lyon, c. 1907.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Edit request

The Queen Mother shot rats at Buckingham Palace in preparation for Nazi attack on Royal Family during WW2, and this should be included in the article. Sources: 1, 2, 3. Peter Ormond 💬 12:04, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The article reads 'During the "Phoney War" the Queen was given revolver training because of fears of imminent invasion.' DrKay (talk) 12:07, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't read that before. But there should be a mention of rats. Peter Ormond 💬 12:18, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, The Daily Telegraph reports that Margaret Rhodes, the Queen's cousin, said that "the numerous rats scared out of their homes by bombs made the perfect target practice." Although no claim that they were used as a tasty supper dish. 12:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)Martinevans123 (talk)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2022

Change was Queen of the United Kingdom to was Queen Consort of the United Kingdom. This is the correct title. Queen is not correct, as it is only awarded to crowned persons, such as Elizabeth II. Westfalentabemono (talk) 15:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:36, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

She was crowned at the Coronation of George VI and Elizabeth. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2022

Per Wikipedia:Short description, dates must be included, I should change to "Queen consort of the United Kingdom from 1936 to 1952" 2001:4452:490:6900:2D6E:BB69:9571:2188 (talk) 09:57, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Name

Surname needs altering to “Windsor (neé Bowes-Lyon)” to signify her married name. 2.101.157.252 (talk) 13:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Core royalty don't have surnames. -ProhibitOnions ^(T) 17:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Why this title?

This isn’t necessarily a request to move this article, but why is the article called “Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother” if the Royal consort convention is the maiden name? Queen Alexandra is “Alexandra of Denmark,” Edward IV’s consort is “Elizabeth Woodville,” and there is “Anne Boleyn,” “Catherine Parr,” etc etc, so why not “Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon?” 24.42.161.213 (talk) 00:21, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

It was decided at Talk:Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother/Archive 2#Requested move. Celia Homeford (talk) 15:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

High time to take another look at this after 11 years. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Wallis Simpson

The word divorcée should be removed from the beginning of the article as it reduces the personhood of Wallis Simpson in favor of a patronizing and antiquated view of women as subjects of their (past) marriages. 65.60.220.61 (talk) 23:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

It's the reason for the abdication. DrKay (talk) 07:42, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

The crusades of politically correct and moral prejudices motivated by the personal concept of "offense" or "disturbance" should have no place on wikipedia, especially when they invalidate the information in the article in favor of a distorted but "morally ethical" version.Sira Aspera (talk) 23:35, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• ColumbiaBicentennialQueenMother.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:07, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 17 July 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. WP:SNOW closure. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Vaulter 16:35, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

---

Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother → Queen Mother Elizabeth – The current title is exceedingly long. The proposed title is a lot simpler. Interstellarity (talk) 21:32, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: Nobody, nowhere, no time, ever, has called her that. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:48, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Per WP:COMMONAME, WP:NCNOB, and the previous RM discussion. The current title appears to be the common name, and there is currently a relevant citation directly in the first paragraph of this article. Wikipedia should not be the judge of whether such a name is "exceedingly long" if a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources continue to use it. Zzyzx11 (talk) 22:31, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
• This source uses the proposed name. Interstellarity (talk) 22:46, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

  Is that the same biography.com web site that is associated with the American TV show Biography? I would need to see more UK and other worldwide sources to be convinced otherwise. Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:28, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose move. Current title is the common name. O.N.R. ^(talk) 00:22, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Is this a joke? Peter Ormond 💬 03:37, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
• Strong oppose "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother" was her official name and title. She was alternatively known as The Queen Mother, but she was never referred to as Queen Mother Elizabeth. Keivan.f^Talk 04:21, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose - Ain't never read anywhere, that she was known by that title or name. GoodDay (talk) 04:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Unrecognizable. Incorrect style. Not the common name. DrKay (talk) 06:37, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per all the above. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:28, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Exceeding long?? A whole two more words. Why not just go for "Cookie"? That's much simpler. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:38, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose WP:PILEON YorkshireExpat (talk) 16:00, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit request

The redirects Queen Mother and The Queen Mother currently point to this article.

Please link to the disambiguation page queen-mother (disambiguation)

Please change

{{Redirect|Queen Mother|the title|Queen mother|other people called Elizabeth the Queen Mother|Elizabeth the Queen Mother (disambiguation)}}

"Queen Mother" redirects here. For the title, see Queen mother. For other people called Elizabeth the Queen Mother, see Elizabeth the Queen Mother (disambiguation).

to:

{{Redirect|Queen Mother|the title|Queen mother|and|Queenmother|other uses|queen-mother (disambiguation)|other people called Elizabeth the Queen Mother|Elizabeth the Queen Mother (disambiguation)}}

"Queen Mother" redirects here. For the title, see Queen mother and Queenmother. For other uses, see queen-mother (disambiguation). For other people called Elizabeth the Queen Mother, see Elizabeth the Queen Mother (disambiguation).

-- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 21:14, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Too complicated. Only the disambiguation pages need to be linked as the articles are all linked from there. DrKay (talk) 06:25, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

That is not "too complicated" and the needed disambiguation pages are for the incoming redirects to this page. Otherwise, people will not be redirect for any incoming redirect to any page where they end up at, for whatever else they are looking for if it isn't at the destination landing page. Clearly "Queen Mother" redirects here, and clearly there are other uses of that topic, and clearly those uses are not "Elizabeth the Queen Mother" if they are for "Queen Mother" that are not "Elizabeth"

Many articles have much more disambiguation pages linked to on their hatnotes than just a single one that is only for the article's title, since they handle the incoming redirects that also have their own disambiguation pages. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 11:08, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

You're not making any sense. The needed disambiguation pages are linked already. DrKay (talk) 12:35, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry about that. For some reason, when I read the page, your edit didn't show up and I still received the version of the page from when I originally filed an edit request for. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 05:27, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Article name first?

Does "the article's name comes first in line one in bold type" not apply to this article? If that is the case, why this particular exception?. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:16, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Per MOS:LEADSENTENCE, "if possible". Exceptions are advised when it is cumbersome or creates clutter. DrKay (talk) 13:22, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes. The idea that an article's lead sentence should be twisted into a pretzel just so it can start by robotically barfing out its own title is one of the silliest of WP myths -- and that's saying a lot. EEng 18:54, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

"cumbersome or creates clutter" is exactly how it looks now... "... Angela Marguerite ... etc" Why not start a move request before too much more time goes by making this article name look more and more obsolete, not to say disrespectfully ridiculous? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:27, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Styled Queen-Empress from 1936-1948?

Hi, I was wondering if in the Titles and styles section a line should be added stating "1936–1948: Her Majesty The Queen-Empress", given that Mary of Teck and Alexandra of Denmark both apparently had this title. Thanks 2A00:23C5:2590:8201:D561:7BE:2DA7:3B13 (talk) 23:17, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

For all of them it matches how their husbands' titles have been listed, though with respect to what sources say. For Alexandra and Mary there are sources available that refer to them as Queen-Empress. I'm sure the titles "King-Emperor" and "Queen-Empress" applied to George VI and Elizabeth as well, so with a solid source you might be able to modify both List of titles and honours of George VI and List of titles and honours of Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. Keivan.f^Talk 15:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 10 September 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. In the support camp, it is generally argued that previous queen consorts should be known by their maiden names. However there are more editors opposing the nomination with many cited WP:COMMONNAME in their comments. As some suggested, this request can be revisited when there are newer sources indicating a change in the common name of the subject. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 13:33, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

---

Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother → Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon – Following the death of her daughter, Queen Mother is no longer an appropriate or useful title as it does not apply to the present. Per Mary of Teck et al. U-Mos (talk) 06:39, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:SUSTAINED and WP:COMMONNAME. Whenever you hear the Queen Mother, you think of Elizabeth. Until such time as we find its no longer in common use, then might be the time. But for now, leave it be. Plus Mary of Teck didn't use the title as she didn't like it. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 07:45, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose as per above, she is still The Queen Mother in common usage (admittedly I'd say Queen Mary is still Queen Mary but that is another discussion). Bayonet-lightbulb (talk) 07:58, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support At any other time I would oppose, but now Charles is king, I think it should be changed to be consistent with other royal consorts in British history. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 12:41, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
  • The problem is that not every "Queen Mother" used the title, Mary of Teck being a good example. I do think WP:COMMMONNAME has to rule out here. The C of E God Save the King! (talk)
• Support Since Queen Elizabeth II has passed and Charles III is the new monarch, Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon cannot be correctly referred to as "Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother." Unlimitedlead (talk) 16:15, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
  • She can if it's still proven to be WP:COMMONNAME/ The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 20:02, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Also, women who were not actually mother of the current monarch can hold the title, and have done so. The title is no more or less correct than it was a week ago. --90.254.226.63 (talk) 07:06, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support The Queen Mother should be known by her maiden name as pervious queen consorts. Her common is already mentioned at the article lead. AKTC3 (talk) 17:47, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

  Queen consorts should not be titled by their maiden names. NCROY is stupid on that point. SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Why shouldn’t they? Past Queen consort have always been known by their maiden names; that is simply convention. AKTC3 (talk) 14:34, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - I support for the reasons listed above. --YoungstownToast (talk) 18:46, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose As per WP:COMMONNAME. If the article title were something like "Queen Elizabeth (mother of the Queen)" then the Queen's death would clearly make change necessary. As it is, it does not seem relevant. Queen Mother is simply a title, and one that is not necessarily held by the actual mother of the reigning monarch. Mary of Teck held it during the Queen's reign, until 1953 and if the Queen had predeceased her mother and Charles had become king while she was still alive, the subject of this article would not have lost that title. So recent events do not alter things. She is still a well-known figure and that is how she is universally known. --90.254.226.63 (talk) 20:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - I support for the reasons listed above. - HLE (talk) 22:29, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support move from obsolete title. The monarch of whom she was queen mother has died. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:28, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose due to WP:COMMONNAME and possibly even WP:RECENTISM. This is her commonly known name that she will be known as for history. News reports currently are still referring to her as that. Also, no other spouse of a monarch has their article as their full name, so changing this will just contradict other article's names. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 00:11, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  No other spouse of a monarch has their article as their “full name” because they were royalty and The Queen Mother was not before her marriage. “Mary of Teck,” was Queen Mary’s maiden name, as “Alexandra of Denmark,” was Queen Alexandra’s maiden name. Plus, there was Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth Woodville, Catherine Howard, etc etc. So no, Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon would not contradict convention. AKTC3 (talk) 03:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - Her title as "Queen Mother" is now defunct with the passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Unless WP:COMMONNAME changes to "Queen Grandmother" I would suggest using her maiden name.TheCurrencyGuy (talk) 04:01, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

The title doesn't become defunct or pass to someone else when a current monarch dies. The death of the Queen is not relevant here. --90.254.226.63 (talk) 06:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

I'd say it does become defunct. If the death of the monarch is irrelevant all of these british queen mothers would still be reffered to as such. Also note the definition used in that article. We have to be consistent across the website. EmilySarah99 (talk) 07:13, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon is not the Monarch's mother. EmilySarah99 (talk) 07:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment The death of Elizabeth II has no effect on her mother's title and rank. She was Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother at the time of her death and that's how she will be referred to as, similar to Albert, Prince Consort (born Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha), and Diana, Princess of Wales (born Diana Spencer). Thus, the argument that she's no longer the Queen Mother is void (Albert is not the Prince Consort and Diana is not the Princess of Wales at the moment either). A case could be made for "Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon" based on WP:NCROY and WP:TITLECON, which would favor maiden names over marital names for royal consorts, but that could work only if it's shown that the current title is not WP:COMMONNAME. Keivan.f^Talk 07:22, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Your association of "Queen Mother" and "Consort [of Queen Victoria]" is irrelevant here. As of the death of Elizabeth II, this article title is obsolete and makes Wikipedia look bad. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:49, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

On the contrary, it's not. Alexandra, the consort of Edward VII is referred to as Queen Alexandra to this day. Just like Mary, the consort of George V who's still Queen Mary. People's titles don't change when they die or their children die. That's not how it works. Keivan.f^Talk 14:49, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. It is not Wikipedia’s role to invent titles. WAIT AND SEE. Royal.uk still refers to her as Queen Mother as there is a strong reason to suspect this will not change (as that is what she was always known as). It is a title - not a description. So let’s wait and see. BeaujolaisFortune (talk) 13:17, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Worth noting that that link describes the younger Elizabeth as the present sovereign, so doesn't really justify continued use of this title. Also not sure how electing to use her full name from earlier in her history would be inventing a title, but I respect there are arguments for either article name at the present time. U-Mos (talk) 07:47, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose She is so commonly known as the "Queen Mother" that even in the coverage involving the Queen's death, they still are calling her the "Queen Mother", and I doubt it might change to the public, being she had that title for about 50 years. If Diana, Princess of Wales was still alive, and William was on the throne, then it might have needed addressed (Please see correction below), but as its very unlikely we'll see the "Queen Mother" used again in the UK till maybe the current Princess of Wales first child would take the throne. TheCorriynial 13:35, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Comment: If Prince William ascended the throne, the title of "Queen Mother" would not need to be addressed because the title is accorded only to queen consorts. Diana was not a queen. Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Correct. He probably would have restored her HRH, but she would not have been the Queen Mother. For example, Lady Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry VII, was simply known as The King's Mother. Keivan.f^Talk 20:34, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

    Thats something I didn't know, so thanks for the correction. But after reading some discussion on Camilla, Queen consort of the United Kingdom, I might be in more in the camp of lets wait until we have some clarity on other members of the family. TheCorriynial (talk) 01:27, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per reasons above. If the queen herself will forever be referred to as Queen Elizabeth, then her mother should, likewise, be the Queen Mother. They still both share the name "Elizabeth", and I certainly don't think we'll have another Elizabeth in the Royal Family for quite some time so as to justify changing the title of this article to minimize confusion. BiscuitsToTheRescue (talk) 21:56, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose Per COMMONNAME and RECOGNIZE. And I agree with BeaujolaisFortune; we shouldn't be inventing titles unless absolutely necessary. InvadingInvader (talk) 03:44, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Support: All other consorts are referred to by their maiden name/titles (except Prince Albert, who was created Prince Consort). I understand she was known as "Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother" but we should follow the same convention. 2601:47:4300:50E0:9CD5:BB4:E81C:348E (talk) 21:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Opposs the death of the queen has NOTHING to do with the commonly used title of The Queen Mother. She is the queen mother and always will be. DailyJew (talk) 07:48, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment Worth making clear that WP:COMMONNAME is by no means a consideration above all else per Wikipedia policy. That section states that the common name is usually that which will best fit the five WP:CRITERIA. So is it in this case? Most recognisable, that probably still is the Queen Mother title for now. Most natural, also probably, though not in the case of all links, where her past is being discussed. Most precise, that's where I'd suggest Bowes-Lyon is now overtaking for the reasons stated. Concise, neither has issues. Consistency, Bowes-Lyon has it. U-Mos (talk) 07:59, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Sure, maybe it's still a common name right now. But will it still be in a year? In five years? The name will be confusing. She has a perfectly valid and accurate name of her own, no need to define her by her relationship with her daughter. The "Queen Mother" title can still be prominently displayed and explained in the lede. SnowFire (talk) 09:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen, Alexandra of Denmark, Mary of Teck etc. --Privybst (talk) 09:31, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Diana, Princess of Wales, Albert, Prince Consort, etc. Plus WP:COMMONNAME. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 14:46, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• @Ficaia: As a side note, Diana is not a royal consort. Her situation is similar to that of Sarah, Duchess of York (another divorced wife a peer). Keivan.f^Talk 21:37, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose unlike other widows of former monarchs, the Queen Mother was part of her official title. The death of Queen Elizabeth II has no effect on Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother's official title. Mrmariomaster (talk) 17:46, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose, per WP:COMMONNAME and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)#Sovereigns (“If there is an overwhelmingly common name, use it”). In a British context, references to The Queen Mother are universally understood as referring to Bowes-Lyon and will continue to be understood as such for quite some time. The name Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon is not commonly used to refer to The Queen Mother and renaming the article would confuse those who only know her by her official title. Qofif (talk) 23:41, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. I say the time to rename this page is when sources start more commonly calling her Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon. 81.78.12.186 (talk) 00:00, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per the interesting discussion, commonname, and the recognition of the informal title of the Queen mum. Randy Kryn (talk) 08:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose. She has been referred to as the Queen Mother since the 1950s. Seems absurd to change what she is called here. J. Van Meter (talk) 12:27, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support - as it's been over 20 years, since her passing. Also, are naming convention for past queen consorts, is to revert them to their maiden names. GoodDay (talk) 21:43, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment – should Camilla, Queen Consort, be moved to Camilla Shand? cookie monster 755 07:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Camilla's page should be moved to Queen Camilla, as King Charles III is still alive. GoodDay (talk) 21:08, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per reasons provided, including WP:COMMONNAME. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 02:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose WP:IFITAINTBROKE. She overwhelmingly is know as The Queen Mother. cookie monster 755 07:03, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose as per WP:COMMONNAME. She is very commonly known as the Queen Mother. Changing the name of the page can happen when sources start calling her by Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon. AkiyamaKana (talk) 08:14, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. She'll always be commonly known as that until there's another Queen Elizabeth who was the Queen Mother. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:51, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Bad solution to a small problem. Wait, wait for sources to reveal a new COMMONNAME. Wikipedia should follow, not lead, the sources. In the meantime, the problem is no big problem, because there is no other Queen Mother causing confusion to readers. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Comment: I looked at Queen Elizabeth II's page, and her mother's name is still her real name, should we change that as well, or leave it be? MasterWolf0928-Æthelwulf (talk) 14:53, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose—upon the death of her husband, she normally would have continued to be called "Queen Elizabeth" after the accession of the new sovereign. Because she and her daughter shared a given name, there was a need to distinguish between them. Thus she was commonly called The Queen Mother. Even now in the various coverage of the events leading up to her daughter's funeral, she's still called The Queen Mother, such as mentioning the last person honored with a Vigil of the Princes, or the last to lie in Westminster Hall was The Queen Mother. Imzadi 1979 → 17:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. This is unquestionable the COMMONNAME by which she is known, even now. While her role as Queen consort during WW2 may be of greather historical significance, there are few today who knew her during that era, while many more knew of her during the half century that she was Queen Mother. --ABehrens (talk) 19:10, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Per COMMONNAME. I doubt the average Brit even knows her real name. Everyone knows her as the "Queen mother". 2001:569:57B2:4D00:B105:8D6C:9739:5779 (talk) 21:08, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose WP: COMMONNAME. The Queen Mother is used the vast majority of the time when referring to he. Therefore, most people would likely put the aforementioned title into the Wikipedia search bar rather than Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon. AmbroseGreypaw (talk) 00:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose WP:COMMONNAME. While the news still refers to her as The Queen Mother, that should be the title. 50.35.79.205 (talk) 20:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose (for now) per WP:COMMONNAME. -Noahfgodard (talk) 20:30, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose she will always be called Queen Eizabeth The Queen Mother. Catfurball (talk) 17:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose as it is her common name and there is currently not a Queen mother at the moment. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 17:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose - this is what she is known by worldwide, and it should stay as it is.

Smuckers ^{It has to be good} 02:59, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

• Strongly Oppose - because she was known as "The Queen Mother" and it would be better to follow WP:COMMONNAME. Noobguy33Talk 03:56, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose - this is still common usage today throughout the world, and my guess for decades to come. I hear "Queen Mother" and I think of no other person. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:40, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment Several media outlets are now referring to Elizabeth II as "the Queen Mother". Just sayin'. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose—people here are thinking of it as though it is a title that is awarded to the mother of the monarch (like is the case with Princess Royal being awarded to eldest daughter) and therefore needs to change to reflect some sort of accuracy like how the article on Prince William adopted Prince of Wales. It is not, it is just a WP:COMMONNAME that was specifically coined to distinguish Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother from Queen Elizabeth II. If it was anything more it would have been changed when the Queen Mother died, never mind Elizabeth II. JamesLewisBedford01 (talk) 10:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Infobox image change

How come the infobox image was changed all of a sudden? 88.108.44.8 (talk) 22:42, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

No idea. I changed it back to a much better pic. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:13, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! --88.108.44.8 (talk) 08:35, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Gates?

Isn't there a set of gates into Hyde Park that were put up as a memorial (no, see below) to the Queen Mother? Is it worth a mention and/or a photo? Istr that the designer or someone said something a bit naff about them, but (personal opinion removed) so I did wonder? Best to all DBaK (talk) 08:13, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Ah OK not a memorial but a 90th BD celebration: Queen Elizabeth Gate. Should it be mentioned from this article, though? My impression is that it isn't ... DBaK (talk) 08:18, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 27 October 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. There were well-made policy arguments on both sides (WP:CONSISTENCY, WP:NCNOB, WP:COMMONNAME, WP:THE, etc) and good source reviews which showed a smattering of usages, with official sources leaning towards the current capitalization. but none of these arguments appeared overtly convincing to assembled participants. With at least one relist already done, I don't see any extenuating reason why this should be relisted again. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 16:12, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

---

Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother → Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother – Per WP:CONSISTENT, for consistency with similar article titles such as William, Prince of Wales, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, Anne, Princess Royal, Prince Andrew, Duke of York, Camilla, Queen Consort, etc. I don't think there is necessarily one right way to style this title, but most of our royal article titles have a comma between the person's name and their trailing title. Looking over reliable sources, they seem to be split on whether or not to have a comma in this particular case. They are also split on whether or not to capitalize the "T" in "the", but it seems like most that use the comma also use a lowercase "t". Some of the sources I have found using a comma and a lowercase "t" are The Guardian, The Telegraph, The New York Times, The Daily Mail, The Independent, The Times, The Gazette, UK Parliament website, Westminster Abbey website, UK National Portrait Gallery CBS News, and Encyclopedia Britannica. And just anecdotally, whenever I have heard a news broadcaster say this person's full title, they always say it with a slight pause between "Queen Elizabeth" and "the Queen Mother", which implies to me that when written there should be a comma in there to indicate a slight pause when it is being pronounced. Rreagan007 (talk) 05:44, 27 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:49, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support. "Queen Elizabeth" and "the Queen Mother" are separate terms, even if they refer to the same person. JIP | Talk 06:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

That does seem to be the case, as she is/was often referred to as simply "the Queen Mother". Rreagan007 (talk) 07:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom. YorkshireExpat (talk) 09:29, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support for consistency. ╠╣uw [talk] 10:01, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support As per above, all other sources seem to use this. echidnaLives - talk - edits 11:11, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. While I agree that the article title is inconsistent with similar articles, the suggested title is even more inconsistent and to make it consistent, we would need to move William, the Prince of Wales, Catherine, the Princess of Wales, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, and so on, and so on. This needs much wider discussion because it impacts multiple articles and will need a change to the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) so that definite articles are used across wikipedia against previous precedent and consensus. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:21, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

  Are you saying you prefer the current title? YorkshireExpat (talk) 12:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

That seems a bit hyperbolic. I don't think moving this one article to the proposed title would do all that anymore than having this article at its current title means that we have to remove commas from all the other royal article titles. The only question being asked here is if the proposed title is better than the current one for this particular subject. This isn't proposing any sort of change to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). And are you proposing that the article be moved to Queen Elizabeth, Queen Mother? Rreagan007 (talk) 17:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

• Weak oppose per Celia Homeford. This looks like a prelude for a mass move request, as is being touted elsewhere: [7][8][9]. If it is not such a prelude then the supporters should make clear that this is a complete one-off that is deliberately inconsistent from other articles, but instead they've used the argument of consistency, which doesn't make sense in this case so the opening argument is flawed. DrKay (talk) 18:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Well all I can tell you is that I nominated this article with no such notions that there would be any other article moves of the type you are suggesting. It honestly didn't even cross my mind. And I did not consult with or collude with any other editors about this proposed move. It was entirely my own idea independent of any other considerations or influences. And I have to say that opposing a move that you think is to a better title simply out of fears of other potential moves in the future doesn't seem like a valid oppose on the merits of this case. And I will ask the same question I asked of the opposer above: are you proposing that the article be moved to Queen Elizabeth, Queen Mother? Rreagan007 (talk) 19:06, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

You're using the wrong tactics. Don't complain about my oppose and ask me a straw man question. That will either entrench my oppose or be ignored. Agree with me. State that this article is a unique case and any move should not be replicated elsewhere. DrKay (talk) 19:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

It wasn't a straw man question. I was legitimately asking if you think Queen Elizabeth, Queen Mother would be a better title for this article than Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother. Regardless, I have no intentions of making any nominations to insert a definite article into any of the other royalty article titles. As I said above, the thought did not even enter my mind before nominating this article. While I don't necessarily think a title such as William, the Prince of Wales would be incorrect, I also don't see a need for inserting a definite article in their either. I would probably be neutral or weakly opposed to it based on WP:CONCISE grounds. So I suppose I do think this article is fairly unique in that way, as the definite article already exists in this article's title, whereas it does not currently exist in the other royalty article titles. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

How about moving to Queen Elizabeth, Duchess of York? YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:04, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I've just realised this makes no sense :D. YorkshireExpat (talk) 21:05, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose as written. While it's possible I could see it changed to "Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother" this isn't the same royalty title as the others.... while is was given by royal accreditation, it is a unique courtesy denomination. I really see nothing wrong with referring to HM Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother as we have done here for quite awhile. It works, readers aren't confused, and nothing's getting broken because of this title. Other items might have to change if we change this per Celia Homeford. Best to leave as is as a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" item. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:12, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nomination, JIP, YorkshireExpat, ╠╣uw and echidnaLives. Main title headers of English Wikipedia entries use forms that are used by WP:RELIABLE SOURCES and this well-researched nomination confirms that reliable sources — both British and American — do use the comma and the lowercase "t". —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:45, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose This will only cause further problems down the road with the articles that we have on dozens of other royals (see the comments by Celia Homeford and DrKay). The title for this article is unique, mainly because unlike her predecessors Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary, "The Queen Mother" was added to her name as a tag along to disambiguate her from her daughter. The letters patent specifically refer to her as "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother" and so does the Royal website, which was incidentally used as the basis to oppose a move from Camilla, Queen Consort to Queen Camilla (and we cannot have double standards here and say that what the website says matters in some cases but not others). The second best alternative to the current title would be "Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon", which is in line with how the other articles on deceased British, English and Scottish queens consort have been titled (and it makes more sense now that her daughter is also deceased; after all she wasn't the only queen mother named Elizabeth). Keivan.f^Talk 00:22, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

  Please see WP:COMMONNAME. Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources). YorkshireExpat (talk) 07:13, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

  There's no evidence it is the common name. If you google "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother", 5 of the top 10 hits are without the comma and 5 are with it. In the next 10, 6 are without the comma and 4 are with it. Etc, etc. That was explicit in the opening comment: "Looking over reliable sources, they seem to be split on whether or not to have a comma in this particular case",[10] which you supported "per nom".[11] Celia Homeford (talk) 07:28, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

  Yes, and here I was pointing out that we should follow independent sources, which the poster was not doing. Please separate the concerns. YorkshireExpat (talk) 16:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

  It is not my responsibility to show that the suggested name is common; it is the nominator's. And it clearly is not, neither in an official nor in any other capacity (media coverage, etc.). Note that I'm not saying that the suggested name is not used by sources, but it is not the sole common name in this case. Keivan.f^Talk 07:02, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

• Move to Queen Elizabeth, Queen Mother to make it consistent with other articles. Interstellarity (talk) 13:28, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose article should not be moved until there is consensus to move it to Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon which I predict reasonably will be within a year or two after the death of the monarch she was queen mother of. For every week that goes by, this article name makes Wikipedia look more and more ridiculous, and it is not urgent to move it just because of one comma. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not understanding your argument against this move. First, how can we possibly know that in several years this article will be moved to the title you predict? Seems like a case of WP:CRYSTAL. And secondly, even if this article will be moved to a different title in several years, why should that prevent us from moving it to a better title now? Rreagan007 (talk) 01:09, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTAL is not about suggestions made on talk pages. It's about not adding things that have not happened yet to article text. It's an important guideline, so it's good to know where its relevant and where it's not. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:29, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

This is probably fair enough tbh. YorkshireExpat (talk) 16:55, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per SergeWoodzing the styling used by The Royal Family. Though I agree, eventually moving Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon would be the most appropriate. Richiepip (talk) 21:59, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Citing William, Prince of Wales or Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex would be improper as they are not the same. William is almost always known officially as “His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales”, never as “His Royal Highness William, the Prince of Wales”. It is the same with Elizabeth, she was always officially known as “Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother”. In the cases of William and Harry, or others mentioned “Prince of Wales”, “Duke of Sussex”, or “Princess Royal” are their titles simply, without their names. “Queen Mother” by itself is and never was an official title, always being qualified as “Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother”. Estar 8806 02:22, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: A later proposal to revert to "Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon" also turned up. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:49, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose No reason to change grammar from stable title. Comparisons to Prince of Wales etc. are irrelevant; William's title is only HRH The Prince of Wales, while Elizabeth's title included her first name (as conventionally, she would have been just "Queen Elizabeth", with "The Queen Mother" included to disambiguate from her daughter). U-Mos (talk) 12:40, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support per WP:CONSISTENT and WP:THE.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:46, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support or Queen Elizabeth, Queen Mother: This has always looked odd to me and I figured there were special rules about royalty that I was not going to take the time to understand. Royal people may be special in some contexts, but on Wikipedia I don't think their names should be capitalized differently from others. SchreiberBike | ⌨  20:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Shwcz (talk) 03:56, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom. There is no reason why there should not be a comma after "Queen Elizabeth". The current article title looks odd and seems ungrammatical. Whether other British royals should have a "the" (e.g. William, the Prince of Wales) is a separate discussion. Natg 19 (talk) 01:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

• That was her official name and title per the royal website and various articles published in The London Gazette. We cannot change it simply because we don't like it or it might sound ungrammatical. Not to mention that it was her common name as well. WP:COMMONNAME overrides all the other arguments here. Keivan.f^Talk 16:24, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Like it or not, this was her common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:40, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Jewelry

Should there be a section on the Crown Jewels ? Like the septet and orb Tristan464 (talk) 19:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

There’s Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Why this title?

The following is a closed discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. There was a formal request for move following this discussion where there was no consensus to move. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

This isn’t necessarily a request to move this article, but why is the article called “Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother” if the Royal consort convention is the maiden name? Queen Alexandra is “Alexandra of Denmark,” Edward IV’s consort is “Elizabeth Woodville,” and there is “Anne Boleyn,” “Catherine Parr,” etc etc, so why not “Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon?” 24.42.161.213 (talk) 00:21, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

It was decided at Talk:Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother/Archive 2#Requested move. Celia Homeford (talk) 15:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

High time to take another look at this after 11 years. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Suggest move

Article name should now be Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon. Current title looks awfully outdated. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:46, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Support She's no longer the mother of the monarch, so the title is somewhat inaccurate. EmilySarah99 (talk) 05:58, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose The fact that she's not the current monarch's mother doesn't make the title inaccurate. She was still the mother of a queen, the longest serving monarch in British history. Most pertinently, she is widely known publicly as "the queen mother" and it's reasonable to anticipate this will remain so even after her daughter's death. 2001:569:57B2:4D00:B105:8D6C:9739:5779 (talk) 21:07, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Support She's no longer the mother of the monarch (if we use the suggestion above it would need to be changed to "a queen's mother") Sciencefish (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Support It would follow normal precedent-Alexandra of Denmark isn't titled "Queen Alexandra the Queen Mother" for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:47:4300:50E0:78F0:135:6600:2DA8 (talk) 22:23, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Support The title is now anachronistic, and notably doesn't follow naming conventions for other consorts. Fishhead64

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

On the parents of Lady Elizabeth Bowes Lyon

On the parents of Lady Elizabeth Bowes Lyon: Prior to when She became the Queen Mother, where are the photographs of her parents the ones that gave birth to her? 72.26.33.190 (talk) 22:57, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2023

Good morning everyone,

I suggest to make a section for Titles and styles just for people to know when she became queen without going through her whole life.

Thanks 86.189.252.45 (talk) 06:54, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done It's in the first sentence, the first line of the infobox under the picture and the short description. So, it's the first thing that any reader will see. Celia Homeford (talk) 08:17, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Infobox image

It seems that the infoboxes of many historical royals have traded in formal paintings for photographs. This was done with Edward VII and George V a while ago, and even with non-British royal figures like George I of Greece. The Queen Mother has been around long for standard photography — why isn’t her infobox image a photograph instead of a painting? Has no one found a high quality and free photograph of Her Majesty? AKTC3 (talk) 07:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Queen

She died on 8th September 2022 2.27.111.133 (talk) 22:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

No that was her daughter. This is the talk page for the article for the other Queen Elizabeth (the last reigning queen's mother). She was also a queen but through her marriage to George VI Ric36 (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

No, she was Queen Consort. That title should be used throughout, not terms like "King and Queen" but "King and Queen Consort". 185.13.50.214 (talk) 13:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

That’s not how it works. When there is a king, his wife is a queen consort, but she is just called the Queen. That’s how it’s always been and that’s how it is for most other monarchies (ex. King and Queen of Spain, King and Queen of Norway). You saying “she wasn’t queen, she was Queen consort,” is contradictory. The only reason why the current queen is called “Queen Consort” is to distinguish her from the late queen Elizabeth II. The current queen will be called The Queen in due time. 68.117.242.195 (talk) 05:47, 18 February 2023 (UTC)