| Revision as of 22:48, 2 October 2004 editConte Giacomo (talk | contribs)1,559 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:21, 13 January 2005 edit undo24.141.214.87 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| *] 09:53, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC) | *] 09:53, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC) | ||
| Someone should add the info about Prince Harrys Nazi scandal | |||
| ---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 00:21, 13 January 2005
The note on circumcision status is copied directly from the article on circumcision on Misplaced Pages.
- 209.217.75.162 09:53, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Someone should add the info about Prince Harrys Nazi scandal
Why is this article Prince Harry of Wales? The Prince HArry is obvious enough - though maybe "Henry Windsor" would be more wikipedia conventional. His dad is Prince of Wales but I don't see that he has anything to do with Wales. His brother will become Prince of Wales in due course. http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/about/biography/harry.html which looks an official site never mentions "of Wales" about him. -- SGBailey 23:25 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
- I think it's probably explained at Talk:Prince William of Wales, though this isn't really my field... -Nommo
- See Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (names and titles) for more info. Atorpen 23:44 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
Why is this article Prince Harry of Wales? Yep, same question, different reason. Why not Prince Henry of Wales, as in the introduction? I'm not British, but actually I severely doubt that "Prince Harry of Wales" is ever used (while just "Prince Harry" is of course common, but colloquial). Am I wrong? -- Jao 15:15, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The proper style for the Prince is "HRH Prince Henry of Wales." "HRH Prince Harry of Wales" is also used, and is both accurate and easily recognisable. -- Emsworth 01:03, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I made this comment at the talk for Prince William of Wales: According to the British Monarchy site, the Prince of Wales is not a title for automatic succession. . Although Charles is the 21st person to hold the title and it is usually reserved for the male heir to the throne, it is only granted "at the sovereign's pleasure". In fact, Prince Charles did not receive the title until 1958 (and was not formally invested until he was 20). Although I agree that differentiating the heirs of Charles is difficult, Wales is not the correct term. --Westendgirl 07:17, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It was explained to me that just as Diana was the Princess of Wales while she and Charles were married, so too are his sons Prince X of Wales -- just not the Prince of Wales, which as you point out is given at the monarch's pleasure to his/her oldest son. - Montréalais 03:51, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- All male British princes and princesses of the blood (HRHs) are known by the territorial title of their fathers. Wales is the correct term for all legitimate children of the Prince of Wales, by comparison HRH Prince Michael of Kent is the son of the Duke of Kent, the late HRH Prince William of Gloucester was the son of the Duke of Gloucester. Following a decree from Queen Victoria:-When the family member ceases to be an HRH (great grandchildren of the sovereign, then they revert to the courtesy title associated with an ordinary peer of their father's rank for example Lord Nicholas Windsor (son of HRH Duke of Kent) as a great grandson of the sovereign (George V) assumes the title of the son of a mere Duke as opposed to a royal Duke. Lord Nicholas' children will be 'Honourable' and their children will be plain Mr or Miss. Royal females, apart from a sovereign queen, no matter what their rank pass no title to their children whatsoever, unless they are married to a titled man, then the children inherit the courtesy titles associated with their father's rank. If this did not happen Britain would eventually be overun by HRHs and titled people.Giano 22:41, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)