User talk:Queen Brandissima

Moves

Firstly, could edit under either this account or your IP address, not both please. Thanks. Secondly, those moves as well as being incorrect were against Wikipedia guidelines. If you think the articles should be moved, talk first not just move straight away. The people in question were Princess of the United Kingdom, so describing them as we do is totally correct. Yes, people may not refer to them as that, but that is immaterial. "Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom" is not a frequently used title for The Queen, but it is the best encyclopedic title. And the same for the princesses.--UpDown 10:46, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

It is not correct in ANY form to list her as Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom. You need to open a book and do some research. She was never ever styled as such and it's inclusion is wholly inaccurate.

You are totally clueless about matters of titles and styles in the UK. A person should never be listed by a title that they were never offically styled by.

You need to cite a reference that acknowledges that she was EVER styled as "Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom" you cannot creat your own titles for people.

I cannot edit articles when I am logged in. I can only contribute to discussions or move articles while I am logged in. Hence, the reason that I always sign my name when I edit without being signed in.

You need to RESEARCH, RESEARCH AND CITE, CITE. Brandy Kelley 11:51, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

And you need to research Wiki policy. Beatrice was a Princess of UK, hence title is totally correct. How could it not be? Your arrogant, know-all attitude is not helping any discussion including this one. --UpDown 11:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, and why can't you edit articles while logged in? Everyone else can. --UpDown 11:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

And where is your reference for her not being a Princess of the UK, because that is what you are suggesting.--UpDown 11:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Because, when I attempt to edit articles logged in it prompts me to open or download the file which then leads me to a dead end. I'm probably not the only person with this problem.

I never once said that she wasn't a princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Ireland. In fact, I specifically stated that she was. What I did state was that was not part of her OFFICAL title. You seem to think the two are interchangeable when the are very different. She was only ever The Princess Beatrice or Princess Henry of Battenberg. There were statements made concerning both at the time of her birth and marriage. I'm sure you can find them in any number of online media archives or reference Marlene Eiler's book Queen Victoria's Decendants.

E.g. HRH The Princess Royal is a princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland, however, this has never been her offical title and to call her "Princess Anne of the United Kingdom" would be wholly incorrect. Sarah, Duchess of York was a princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland during her marriage. But, as I keep pointing out this is not how she was styled.

I'm sure you can recollect that when The Prince of Wales was to marry Camilla an offical statement was made to reflect how she would be offically known (this information is still viewable on his offical website). While this doesn't change the fact that she legally became The Princess of Wales, ect it would make it incorrect to start an article about her and call her HRH Princess Camilla of the United Kingdom or even The Princess of Wales. Camilla's correct written and spoken title is Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cornwall. I'm not sure how else I can explain it to you that no member of the royal family past or present has ever been styled as Prince/ss Name of the United Kingdom. Brandy Kelley 13:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC) Queen Brandissima

I can't explain the problem you have when signining in, but I have never heard this being a problem before. I suggest you ask someone how to fix it. And it is part of their official style, yes its not regulary used, because you wouldn't in everyday conversation say "Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom" you would say "Princess Beatrice". In the UK, there is no need to use "of the United Kingdom" because they are in this country so its redunant. Abroad it would be used. And yes it would be incorrect to call Camilla Princess Camilla because she holds no title, only blood princess may use their forename after Princess (Hence Princess Michael of Kent). And you right they have never been "styled" Princess x of the United Kingdom, at least not in the UK, but that does not mean they are not that legally. There is a big difference between styling and legality.--

UpDown 07:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No it was not ever part of her offical style. You can go the the London Gazette and search for her and view the various forms that she was offically known by during her life none of which was ever Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom. By your view, The Princess Royal could be Princess Anne of the United Kingdom which is not now nor has it ever been part of her offical title.

I'm not really bothered by not being able to edit while signed in. It isn't causing any problems.

BTW, if you are going to continually change the citation I have provided to an acutal source concerning the surname then you need to either leave off your citation or have to go to an actual reference. A statement written by you is not reference it isn't even verifiable and is against wiki conventions. You are doing the very thing that you seem to be upset about other people doing. You statement is actually incorrect. It's worded to matter of factly and implies that it is a fact when it is not. It doesn't even agree with the Letters Patent and Royal Warrants, and I have repeatedly pointed out to you where you can find the full text of each.

Additionally, you should see either Burke's, Black's or Debrett's for the correct usage of Dowager. The term queen dowager actually made more sense in the article about Queen Alexandra than does Queen Mother, and the sentence worked just fine. Brandy Kelley 08:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

The reason I reverted the Queen Dowager bit on Alexandra's page was your change meant it did not fit with the rest of the sentence which talked about why "queen mother". If you wish to put queen doagwer, fine, but change the whole sentence. And I suggest we agree to disagree on matter of Princess of the UK. You are continuing to confuse who someone is styled and how they can be legally titled. And it is fact, but it was DBD who has changed them back. I think how Prince Andrew's is worded is very good; "The 1960 Order-in-Council giving the surname Mountbatten-Windsor to the male-line descendants of the Duke of Edinburgh and Elizabeth II specifically refers only to such descendants without a royal title, as those with it generally have no need for a surname. Despite this, the Duke of York (like his sister) entered with this surname in the marriage register." --UpDown 09:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Windsor —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Queen Brandissima (talk • contribs) 13:38:31, August 19, 2007 (UTC).