Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother is a
featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the
Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it,
please do so.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the
Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the
project page, where you can
join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horse racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Horse racing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Horse racingWikipedia:WikiProject Horse racingTemplate:WikiProject Horse racingHorse racing articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Hertfordshire, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.HertfordshireWikipedia:WikiProject HertfordshireTemplate:WikiProject HertfordshireHertfordshire articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Scotland and
Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
the quote from the soldier she treated should be removed from this page. The page cannot be modified for avoiding vandalism, yet the language used by the soldier she treated is injurious itself. Some magazines or journals may use this language, but I see no point in using it on Wikipedia (I wanted to remove that part, but unfortunately there's the lock on it to avoid "vandalism"). Surely the soldier used the same horrific words to give a different meaning and to give a better meaning and praise the queen, but even just such injurious and violent language should not be allowed here especially when not relevant and not really explaining historical facts (which still I would avoid explaining if so violent). Hopefully someone decides to remove the quote of the soldier she treated.
This is the part that uses offensive, violent and graphicly violent language to "praise"(???) the queen which I hope can be removed from the entire page: "One of the soldiers she treated wrote in her autograph book that she was to be "Hung, drawn, & quartered ... Hung in diamonds, drawn in a coach and four, and quartered in the best house in the land."[16]".
5.168.135.139 (
talk) 08:52, 19 August 2023 (UTC)reply
You are completely misreading the tone of what the soldier wrote. I don't know your cultural background but to British and North American ears, the soldier's quote is almost comically sweet and extravagant. There's nothing remotely offensive in the context of the soldier's culture or Elizabeth's.
Pascalulu88 (
talk) 23:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2023
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
[Reasoning: She was Queen by right of her husband, King George VI. She was not "Queen regnant," as was her daughter, Elizabeth II.]
2600:1008:B164:12EF:EA1B:11FD:93F2:1A07 (
talk) 01:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Not done: please provide
reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.
M.Bitton (
talk) 18:35, 26 October 2023 (UTC)reply
The word "Queen" alone does not imply that she was a queen regnant. A queen can be queen regnant or queen consort but the title is "The Queen". The opening sentence makes it clear that she is the latter by stating that she was Queen of the UK as the wife of George VI. Keivan.fTalk 19:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Infobox image (3)
Given the number of actual photographs that exist of the subject, I don't know why we are using a painted portrait of her as the main infobox image (it is simply not done for any other monarchs or consorts of whom photos do exist). I have selected a few suitable candidates from the Commons which I am going to list below. Everyone is welcome to take a look at them and examine license details, etc.; or even add to the list. Depending on the level of participation, I might turn this into an RfC to get a broader consensus. Keivan.fTalk 19:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Option A (1925, coloured)
Option B (1939)
Option C (1942)
Option D (1970)
Option E (1975)
Option F (undated)
I prefer the painted portrait. It's in colour and it's realistic, so I see no advantage in using a black and white or false colour photograph.
Celia Homeford (
talk) 09:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)reply
We don't have a policy that dictates the use of colour photographs. Personally, I believe no matter how realistic the painted portrait looks, it's still a painting and is not as accurate as a photograph when it comes to showing facial features. Let's see what others might think. Keivan.fTalk 13:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Since she was queen consort between 1936 and 1952, and her and her husband excelled at inspiring the citizens throughout World War II, perhaps an image of her during those years may be appropriate as a lead image. Will be interested in reading comments from others on this topic. Then again, the present image is very noble and well done, and portrays her during her many years of being honored by her country.
Randy Kryn (
talk) 13:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)reply
I think an image during her time as consort would be more appropriate as lead image. However the current lead image is clearer than the alternatives provided so would lean towards keeping what we already have.
Mn1548 (
talk) 18:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)reply
How long ...
... may I ask, are we going to keep calling her "The Queen Mother", as if she was one still, as if that were part of her name, and as if there have never been others? Looks ridiculous. Respectful? Just askin'.
SergeWoodzing (
talk) 23:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
It is "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother", so until such time as she is
displaced in sources by a different Queen Mother. But in actuality she will always be a "Queen Mother" by usage even though she is no longer the mother of a reigning sovereign. Just sayin'.
Fyunck(click) (
talk) 23:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother is a
featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the
Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it,
please do so.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the
Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the
project page, where you can
join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horse racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Horse racing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Horse racingWikipedia:WikiProject Horse racingTemplate:WikiProject Horse racingHorse racing articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Hertfordshire, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.HertfordshireWikipedia:WikiProject HertfordshireTemplate:WikiProject HertfordshireHertfordshire articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Scotland and
Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
the quote from the soldier she treated should be removed from this page. The page cannot be modified for avoiding vandalism, yet the language used by the soldier she treated is injurious itself. Some magazines or journals may use this language, but I see no point in using it on Wikipedia (I wanted to remove that part, but unfortunately there's the lock on it to avoid "vandalism"). Surely the soldier used the same horrific words to give a different meaning and to give a better meaning and praise the queen, but even just such injurious and violent language should not be allowed here especially when not relevant and not really explaining historical facts (which still I would avoid explaining if so violent). Hopefully someone decides to remove the quote of the soldier she treated.
This is the part that uses offensive, violent and graphicly violent language to "praise"(???) the queen which I hope can be removed from the entire page: "One of the soldiers she treated wrote in her autograph book that she was to be "Hung, drawn, & quartered ... Hung in diamonds, drawn in a coach and four, and quartered in the best house in the land."[16]".
5.168.135.139 (
talk) 08:52, 19 August 2023 (UTC)reply
You are completely misreading the tone of what the soldier wrote. I don't know your cultural background but to British and North American ears, the soldier's quote is almost comically sweet and extravagant. There's nothing remotely offensive in the context of the soldier's culture or Elizabeth's.
Pascalulu88 (
talk) 23:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2023
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
[Reasoning: She was Queen by right of her husband, King George VI. She was not "Queen regnant," as was her daughter, Elizabeth II.]
2600:1008:B164:12EF:EA1B:11FD:93F2:1A07 (
talk) 01:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Not done: please provide
reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.
M.Bitton (
talk) 18:35, 26 October 2023 (UTC)reply
The word "Queen" alone does not imply that she was a queen regnant. A queen can be queen regnant or queen consort but the title is "The Queen". The opening sentence makes it clear that she is the latter by stating that she was Queen of the UK as the wife of George VI. Keivan.fTalk 19:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Infobox image (3)
Given the number of actual photographs that exist of the subject, I don't know why we are using a painted portrait of her as the main infobox image (it is simply not done for any other monarchs or consorts of whom photos do exist). I have selected a few suitable candidates from the Commons which I am going to list below. Everyone is welcome to take a look at them and examine license details, etc.; or even add to the list. Depending on the level of participation, I might turn this into an RfC to get a broader consensus. Keivan.fTalk 19:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Option A (1925, coloured)
Option B (1939)
Option C (1942)
Option D (1970)
Option E (1975)
Option F (undated)
I prefer the painted portrait. It's in colour and it's realistic, so I see no advantage in using a black and white or false colour photograph.
Celia Homeford (
talk) 09:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)reply
We don't have a policy that dictates the use of colour photographs. Personally, I believe no matter how realistic the painted portrait looks, it's still a painting and is not as accurate as a photograph when it comes to showing facial features. Let's see what others might think. Keivan.fTalk 13:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Since she was queen consort between 1936 and 1952, and her and her husband excelled at inspiring the citizens throughout World War II, perhaps an image of her during those years may be appropriate as a lead image. Will be interested in reading comments from others on this topic. Then again, the present image is very noble and well done, and portrays her during her many years of being honored by her country.
Randy Kryn (
talk) 13:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)reply
I think an image during her time as consort would be more appropriate as lead image. However the current lead image is clearer than the alternatives provided so would lean towards keeping what we already have.
Mn1548 (
talk) 18:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)reply
How long ...
... may I ask, are we going to keep calling her "The Queen Mother", as if she was one still, as if that were part of her name, and as if there have never been others? Looks ridiculous. Respectful? Just askin'.
SergeWoodzing (
talk) 23:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
It is "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother", so until such time as she is
displaced in sources by a different Queen Mother. But in actuality she will always be a "Queen Mother" by usage even though she is no longer the mother of a reigning sovereign. Just sayin'.
Fyunck(click) (
talk) 23:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply