This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sarah, Duchess of York article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 23, 2006, July 23, 2007, July 23, 2008, July 23, 2012, and July 23, 2016. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Surtsicna: Deleting the Ancestors section [1] does not seem a constructive edit, particularly as by default her ancestry tree was hidden. Thosbsamsgom: I think her ancestry tree would be more useful if it went further back to illustrate the ancestry claimed in the second paragraph of the Early life section. I find the visual representation easier to follow than the text.
213.18.173.87 ( talk) 23:00, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Is she a really a member of the royal family. She does not participate in any events. She is not as well known as before. She is a divorced member of the royal family. I think associate of the royal family or something along the lines of that will be more justifiable Theeveralst ( talk) 21:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Sarah, Duchess of York (born Sarah Margaret Ferguson; 15 October 1959), nicknamed Fergie, is a member of the British royal family. She is the former wife of Prince Andrew, Duke of York, a younger brother of King Charles III.If Sarah, Duchess of York's status as a royal family member is in question, maybe we should just delete that reference and simply say
Sarah, Duchess of York (born Sarah Margaret Ferguson; 15 October 1959), nicknamed Fergie, is the former wife of Prince Andrew, Duke of York, a younger brother of King Charles III.I don't have a strong opinion about this either way. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 22:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
I think it is best to have a vote on this matter Theeveralst ( talk) 21:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
[t]he first sentence [of a biography] should usually state...[t]he main reason the person is notable (key accomplishment, record, etc.). In Sarah's case, her claim to notability is drawn hugely from her status at Andrew's ex-wife. If there's dispute over whether she should be considered a royal family member, then I suggest amending this statement by replacing "a member of the British royal family" with "the former wife of Andrew, Duke of York]]" (or perhaps former daughter-in-law of Queen Elizabeth II or former sister-in-law of King Charles III), but (and I know this contradicts my statement above) I don't think we should omit her relationship with the royal family completely. Thank you, Aoi (青い) ( talk) 19:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
I've restored the longstanding lead image, which appears to have been the lead image since November 2017. Please stop edit-warring and get consensus here on the talk page for whatever replacement image you want. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 22:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
The nickname "Fergie" has been in the lede intermittently; it was most recently removed without comment by Keivan.f on 3 October, then restored by Park3r; then re-removed by Kievan.f with the comment:
This was discussed before and the consensus was against including it. All royals have nicknames; Elizabeth II's was Lilibet, George VI's was Bertie, William's is Will, Catherine's is Kate, etc. Yet there's no need to mention them in the lede when these nicknames have not used officially by the subjects.
1. I can't see a decision being made on this in the past - can anyone point me to that?
2. Regarding: "when these nicknames have not used officially by the subjects" - firstly, she does use the name officially, for example in the title of her Youtube series, "Storytime with Fergie and Friends". Secondly, the subject's own naming is not definitive on Wikipedia, rather that used by sources. Looking at the references on this article, 27 of them (14%) use "Fergie" in their titles to refer to the subject of the article. For comparison, not a single one of the 320 sources on Elizabeth II's page uses "Lilibet" in the title. ("Kate" and "Will" are different cases, as they are common hypocorisms of their first names, on which Wikipedia has a specific policy.)
"Fergie" is clearly an extremely common name used by our sources to refer to the subject of this article - by my reading of MOS:NICKNAME it should be included in the lead. Can anyone provide a policy-based reason why it shouldn't be? TSP ( talk) 18:41, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Looking back through article history, I found these relevant edits:
[Edited to add:]
Between those edits, and this debate, I count four logged-in editors, plus two IPs, moving to have this included; versus just the one editor opposing that. As there is, at the very least, no policy either way; and the basic arguments used in removing it seem to have been disproved (the name is used by the subject, as well as by sources; there does not appear to be any previously-established consensus for removal), I'd suggest the indications are in favour of inclusion, in the absence of a contrary consensus emerging reasonably swiftly. TSP ( talk) 22:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Article says
Article needs to provide some explanation as to what a "chalet girl" is.
(To User Celia Homeford: No, I have not seen "the film", nor would it make any difference if I had. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be comprehensible to a general audience, not just to people who have seen certain films.)
- 189.122.243.241 ( talk) 22:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Has there been an RFC regarding the her title Duchess of York?, as she is divorced surely she no longer holds that title as it usually belongs to the current wife of that royal. ChefBear01 ( talk) 08:15, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sarah, Duchess of York article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 23, 2006, July 23, 2007, July 23, 2008, July 23, 2012, and July 23, 2016. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Surtsicna: Deleting the Ancestors section [1] does not seem a constructive edit, particularly as by default her ancestry tree was hidden. Thosbsamsgom: I think her ancestry tree would be more useful if it went further back to illustrate the ancestry claimed in the second paragraph of the Early life section. I find the visual representation easier to follow than the text.
213.18.173.87 ( talk) 23:00, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Is she a really a member of the royal family. She does not participate in any events. She is not as well known as before. She is a divorced member of the royal family. I think associate of the royal family or something along the lines of that will be more justifiable Theeveralst ( talk) 21:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Sarah, Duchess of York (born Sarah Margaret Ferguson; 15 October 1959), nicknamed Fergie, is a member of the British royal family. She is the former wife of Prince Andrew, Duke of York, a younger brother of King Charles III.If Sarah, Duchess of York's status as a royal family member is in question, maybe we should just delete that reference and simply say
Sarah, Duchess of York (born Sarah Margaret Ferguson; 15 October 1959), nicknamed Fergie, is the former wife of Prince Andrew, Duke of York, a younger brother of King Charles III.I don't have a strong opinion about this either way. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 22:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
I think it is best to have a vote on this matter Theeveralst ( talk) 21:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
[t]he first sentence [of a biography] should usually state...[t]he main reason the person is notable (key accomplishment, record, etc.). In Sarah's case, her claim to notability is drawn hugely from her status at Andrew's ex-wife. If there's dispute over whether she should be considered a royal family member, then I suggest amending this statement by replacing "a member of the British royal family" with "the former wife of Andrew, Duke of York]]" (or perhaps former daughter-in-law of Queen Elizabeth II or former sister-in-law of King Charles III), but (and I know this contradicts my statement above) I don't think we should omit her relationship with the royal family completely. Thank you, Aoi (青い) ( talk) 19:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
I've restored the longstanding lead image, which appears to have been the lead image since November 2017. Please stop edit-warring and get consensus here on the talk page for whatever replacement image you want. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 22:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
The nickname "Fergie" has been in the lede intermittently; it was most recently removed without comment by Keivan.f on 3 October, then restored by Park3r; then re-removed by Kievan.f with the comment:
This was discussed before and the consensus was against including it. All royals have nicknames; Elizabeth II's was Lilibet, George VI's was Bertie, William's is Will, Catherine's is Kate, etc. Yet there's no need to mention them in the lede when these nicknames have not used officially by the subjects.
1. I can't see a decision being made on this in the past - can anyone point me to that?
2. Regarding: "when these nicknames have not used officially by the subjects" - firstly, she does use the name officially, for example in the title of her Youtube series, "Storytime with Fergie and Friends". Secondly, the subject's own naming is not definitive on Wikipedia, rather that used by sources. Looking at the references on this article, 27 of them (14%) use "Fergie" in their titles to refer to the subject of the article. For comparison, not a single one of the 320 sources on Elizabeth II's page uses "Lilibet" in the title. ("Kate" and "Will" are different cases, as they are common hypocorisms of their first names, on which Wikipedia has a specific policy.)
"Fergie" is clearly an extremely common name used by our sources to refer to the subject of this article - by my reading of MOS:NICKNAME it should be included in the lead. Can anyone provide a policy-based reason why it shouldn't be? TSP ( talk) 18:41, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Looking back through article history, I found these relevant edits:
[Edited to add:]
Between those edits, and this debate, I count four logged-in editors, plus two IPs, moving to have this included; versus just the one editor opposing that. As there is, at the very least, no policy either way; and the basic arguments used in removing it seem to have been disproved (the name is used by the subject, as well as by sources; there does not appear to be any previously-established consensus for removal), I'd suggest the indications are in favour of inclusion, in the absence of a contrary consensus emerging reasonably swiftly. TSP ( talk) 22:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Article says
Article needs to provide some explanation as to what a "chalet girl" is.
(To User Celia Homeford: No, I have not seen "the film", nor would it make any difference if I had. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be comprehensible to a general audience, not just to people who have seen certain films.)
- 189.122.243.241 ( talk) 22:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Has there been an RFC regarding the her title Duchess of York?, as she is divorced surely she no longer holds that title as it usually belongs to the current wife of that royal. ChefBear01 ( talk) 08:15, 22 January 2024 (UTC)