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 sourcedmust 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 is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elizabeth II article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is undergoing a featured article review. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria.
If the article has been moved from its initial review period to the Featured Article Removal Candidate (FARC) section, you may support or contest its removal.
Queen Elizabeth II (pictured) once worked as a lorry driver?
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
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 Commonwealth, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Commonwealth of Nations 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.CommonwealthWikipedia:WikiProject CommonwealthTemplate:WikiProject CommonwealthCommonwealth articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Melanesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Melanesia 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.MelanesiaWikipedia:WikiProject MelanesiaTemplate:WikiProject MelanesiaMelanesia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polynesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Polynesia 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.PolynesiaWikipedia:WikiProject PolynesiaTemplate:WikiProject PolynesiaPolynesia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belize, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belize 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.BelizeWikipedia:WikiProject BelizeTemplate:WikiProject BelizeBelize articles
Elizabeth II is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Grenada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Grenada 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.GrenadaWikipedia:WikiProject GrenadaTemplate:WikiProject GrenadaGrenada articles
Elizabeth II is within the scope of WikiProject Zimbabwe, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Zimbabwe and Zimbabwe-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.ZimbabweWikipedia:WikiProject ZimbabweTemplate:WikiProject ZimbabweZimbabwe articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malta, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malta 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.MaltaWikipedia:WikiProject MaltaTemplate:WikiProject MaltaMalta articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa 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.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Elizabeth II is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scouting and Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations, WAGGGS and WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ScoutingWikipedia:WikiProject ScoutingTemplate:WikiProject ScoutingScouting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom 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 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 written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article has previously been nominated to be moved.
Jody Serrano (9 September 2022). "How Wikipedia's 'Deaditors' Sprang Into Action on Queen Elizabeth II's Page After Her Death". Gizmodo. While some on the internet were glued to Twitter or the BBC, checking for news or watching the planes en route to Balmoral Castle, one group of dedicated Wikipedia editors sprang into action updating the late queen's page in the minutes after Buckingham Palace announced the news.
Annie Rauwerda (9 September 2022). "Who the hell updated Queen Elizabeth II's Wikipedia page so quickly?". Input. Upon Queen Elizabeth II's death, the world was quick to note the free encyclopedia's up-to-the-minute coverage. "WIKIPEDIA DIDN'T WASTE ANY TIME," someone tweeted. "Someone was in there watching her last breaths with a computer on wikipedia ready to just press enter," another joked.
Jeff Parsons (9 September 2022). "How Wikipedia responded when news of the Queen's death broke". Metro (British newspaper). In the case of the Queen's death, the legion of volunteers that keep up the 'Free Encyclopedia' sprang into action to keep it updated. The first edit made to the Queen's Wikipedia page came just minutes after the first sources broke the news.
Q1: I don't like the portrait, I think this other picture is much better.
A1: There was
avoid restarting the discussion
.
The photo
As an ordinary member of the public, the photo is terrible. Please change to a photo from when she was in her nineties or eighties (how she is currently remembered) or to the coronation photo (which is the best historical one). The one chosen is just not very good at all. 86.150.46.183 (talk) 18:01, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I agree, but for some reason the mediocre 1958 image has a fan club.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 18:17, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The current photo is quite good in my humble opinion. — Red-tailed hawk(nest) 15:06, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. This is a story about her whole life, and a mid-life image represents that better than one from an extreme of age or youth. We already had a lot of discussion on this, not very long ago, and the current image represents the consensus. Thparkth (talk) 18:09, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is a very bad photo. The argument that it is at mid point is senseless because that is not a point from mid point. Would make sense to choose a photo from the mid 60s or early 1970s. This is just a very poor random photo. Also, you do not choose photos for historical figures like that. Most pictures with other monarchs have a prominent historical photo. Others have photos as the person was when they died. Use the coronation photo when she was 27 or photo near the end of her life. That one is just utterly dreadful.--86.149.15.109 (talk) 12:14, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we did have a very extensive discussion about photo choice, and the current article reflects the consensus of that discussion. What confuses me though is why you describe it as "a very poor random photo", "utterly dreadful" and not "a prominent historical photo". Are we talking about the same picture? You do mean this one, right? It is an official portrait of the Queen in full regalia, from the time of her historical tour of Canada and the USA. It isn't some random polaroid snapshot. Thparkth (talk) 12:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is the photo currently in use taken in 1958 or 1959 (?
The photo in the article is from 1958
But the file information says the photo is from 1959
Is the queen in this picture taken as the queen of canada or as the queen of england
In which capacity is she taking the official photo 61.216.108.177 (talk) 05:56, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There hasn't been a King or Queen of England since 1707. I believe you likely meant United Kingdom. GoodDay (talk) 05:59, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Or is this an official photo of the Queen as Queen of United Kingdom? 61.216.108.177 (talk) 01:57, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Religion
Should we include her religion in the infobox? Consensus is to include it for her father George VI and her son Charles III. Векочел (talk) 19:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know why it's included in George VI & Charles III's infoboxes. Are they included in all the British monarch infoboxes & their predecessors, the English, Scottish, Irish & Welsh monarch infoboxes? GoodDay (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, but perhaps it should be included for all the English and British monarchs since Henry VIII. The monarch is the head of the Church of England, which seems like an important religious role. Векочел (talk) 20:48, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What about the Scottish, Irish & Welsh monarchs? GoodDay (talk) 20:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have any evidence that their religious beliefs were particularly significant, but it can be added for particular monarchs if it is significant for them. Векочел (talk) 04:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I checked over the bios of Henry VIII through Anne, then George I through Charles III. Nearly all the English & British monarch bios mention their religion. Some most say Protestant or Anglican, while one or two say Catholic. So, I've no objections to adding Elizabeth II's religion to her infobox. Besides, the religion in mentioned in both her immediate predecessors & successors' infoboxes. GoodDay (talk) 04:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox
Does anyone else find that "(list)" part of the infobox strange? It does not look visually appealing to me. What if List of sovereign states headed by Elizabeth II was linked to "other", like shown below:
Is the photo currently in use taken in 1958 or 1959 (?
The photo in the article is from 1958
But the file information says the photo is from 1959
Is this an article error
I think it probably was taken in 1958 (per similarity in setting, costume and style to another shoot that was definitely in 1958) but since our source says 1959, and
WP:NOTTRUTH etc... we should say 1959. Thparkth (talk) 21:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Can you provide photos similar to what you are talking about? 61.216.108.177 (talk) 05:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your guess may be right, but Wikipedia in other languages is written in 1959 according to the file name, and the more detailed information of the file cannot be confirmed. 2401:E180:88E0:C1D:45A2:6ED5:8519:218A (talk) 04:20, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
According to your idea, do you need to adjust or supplement information 61.216.108.177 (talk) 03:21, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Thparkth that absent a reliable source that expressly says the photo is from 1958 (and there doesn't appear to be any), we should stick with the 1959 date given in the source. Alternatively, we could amend the caption to say something like, "Official photograph taken for 1959 tour", but that might be too wordy for the infobox. Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 November 2022
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
There is a comma that is not needed.
Change: "During the Platinum Jubilee celebrations, Elizabeth was largely confined to balcony appearances, and missed the National Service of Thanksgiving."
To: "During the Platinum Jubilee celebrations, Elizabeth was largely confined to balcony appearances and missed the National Service of Thanksgiving." Ghost of Kiev(talk) 15:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any difference. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:39, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry. I have fixed it to make a difference. Ghost of Kiev(talk) 15:50, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah I see. THis makes more sense however the comma there may be some sort of british english thin. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:16, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done The punctuation differences of British English seem to be mostly related to quotation marks from what I found here, so I made the change. But if any new info comes up, feel free to restore the old version. TimSmit (talk) 17:36, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not really suitable. I saw this in the news over the weekend and it involves Gyles Brandreth who has a new book out, Elizabeth: An Intimate Portrait, in which he says that the Queen had multiple myeloma and this was the cause of her death. Closer examination shows that Brandreth relies on hearsay and cannot/will not give a direct source for this. So it isn't worth adding.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 13:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This needs better sourcing before we can add something like that. And it still remains that the "official" cause of death is what's listed on her death certificate. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:55, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Heard about this, during the last few weeks of her life. GoodDay (talk) 18:59, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, no one dies of old age. It is a polite fiction. There is always a specific cause. But until a reliable source provides details, "old age" is what we have to say. Thparkth (talk) 04:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In Scotland, where the Queen died, old age is a perfectly valid cause for a doctor to write on a death certificate. And that's what her doctor did. HiLo48 (talk) 06:06, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Until reliable sources tells us anything further? it's "old age" GoodDay (talk) 06:07, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
News items involving this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on September 9, 2015, June 2, 2022, and September 8, 2022.
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 2, 2004, February 6, 2005, June 2, 2005, February 6, 2006, June 2, 2006, June 2, 2007, February 6, 2008, February 6, 2009, February 6, 2010, February 6, 2012, February 6, 2015, February 6, 2017, February 6, 2019, and February 6, 2022.
.svg){kind=logo}
.svg)
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
_(cropped)_(3-to-4_aspect_ratio).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped)_(3-to-4_aspect_ratio).jpg){kind=link}
