Talk:Wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank

This article was nominated for deletion on 25 January 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank at the Reference desk.

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.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 24 January 2018 by reviewer Gbawden (talk · contribs).

Berkshire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Berkshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Berkshire 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.BerkshireWikipedia:WikiProject BerkshireTemplate:WikiProject BerkshireBerkshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

British Royalty Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Article for deletion[edit]

Why is this article being considered for deletion if it follows all the requirements of a Wikipedia article ? 181.67.252.166 (talk) 18:36, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because its notability is questionable (meaning it may not meet the requirements of a Wikipedia article). Nixon Now (talk) 19:26, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are other Wikipedia pages about Royal weddings of lesser known royals like Princess Madeleine’s wedding article, Princess Eugenie’s wedding is already getting a lot of attention from the public perhaps not as much as Harry’s but still it’s causing a lot of expectation from the public as well as the media , articles about royals and aristocrats are important and valuable as the individuals are socially notable. MaliG28 (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Specially if the bride (Princess Eugenie) is the granddaughter of the Queen , like I said before there are other wedding articles of royals who are less known than her , like the wedding articles of Princess Madeleine, Prince Carl Phillip, Crown Prince Pavlos all of them are less known than any member of the British Royal Family and yet their weddings have Wikipedia articles and their notability are not questionable ? But this article’s is? MaliG28 (talk) 21:46, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MaliG28: If you are in favor of keeping this article, you can vote here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank. Keivan.f^Talk 22:36, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues[edit]

If this article survives AFD then there are some issues that need addressing. The tabloid edits (Marie Claire, etc) need to be replaced by better ones, as does AOL news (which tends to expire quite quickly), and the Twitter post should definitely go.

Genealogical relation between the couple[edit]

Wea already have a mention in the article about relationship (which I dont think is really noteworthy in relationship to the wedding) and now we have had a user adding a large table of of guff that doesnt add anything to the article apart from using up a lot of space. We need to stick to what reliable references have said about the genealogical relation. The table should be removed as a challenged edit and a consensus gained by User:Anotherwikipedianuser to include it, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 15:08, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion (2)[edit]

having such articles just do harm to our next generation by following such useless info on ordinary people. we are in 2018, all humans must be equal. Who decided Mr or Mrs X deserves 50 Wikipedia Articles from their daily life? Media? I would really be interested in a logical Answer to my wondering and not just fighting \ screaming at each other discussion \ Argue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.23.163.239 (talk) 11:43, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Media have no power here. The existence of this article was decided at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:51, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. But the decision place you mentioned has a handful comments (votes) of few human beings. Is that considered a worthy \final decision making? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.23.163.239 (talk) 13:06, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete this nonsense.217.92.235.144 (talk) 18:37, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms (NPOV)[edit]

There have been a number of news articles published criticizing the wedding for its costs at public expense. This should be in the article to provide balance 199.7.156.128 (talk) 11:57, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

then added — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8804:8100:4430:BD41:ABDC:C14F:EADF (talk) 13:06, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The information regarding the cost of the ceremony has been added. Keivan.f^Talk 02:46, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Guests[edit]

Please list them.217.92.235.144 (talk) 19:56, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They have been listed under the section "Guests". Keivan.f^Talk 00:25, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are we making a separate page for the guests though, the number of famous faces seems equal to those at Harry and Meghan's? Prancer16 (talk) 02:06, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Prancer16: Right now I have listed the notable ones in the body of this article. If and only if you can find 'reliable' sources that include a complete list of all the guests, then you'll probably can create a separate article for it, just like the ones that have been created for William and Catherine, and Harry and Meghan. Keivan.f^Talk 04:23, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]