Talk:Alex Kingston

Rampant Rabbit?
 Mr  JM 02:30, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The Fortunes and Misfortunes of Moll Flanders
The link in the filmography is to the Robin Wright-Penn/Morgan Freeman film and not to the superior (IMO) TV series where Alex Kingston starred with Daniel Craig. TheOneOnTheLeft (talk) 11:14, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Broken Images
Both images in this article ( and ) are currently broken.

If you have an image with the appropriate license, please do upload it and make the relevant changes to the article.

For the time being, I've removed the broken references.

46.116.154.25 (talk) 13:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. I found one on Flickr with a CC license. Pburka (talk) 01:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Place of Birth
The article states that Alex was born and grew up in Surrey, however all other sources say London. There are no citations supporting this. This needs to be amended in the article, or proper citations added. Belfry (talk) 02:04, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Born just outside of London, England, in the suburban area of Surrey" . Drbits (talk) 07:12, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

paternal great-great-grandmother was Jewish
What is the relevance of this: 'paternal great-great-grandmother was Jewish' ? She does actually look and talks Jewish! [takes one to know one] Even if her father was Halachically Jewish she would at best be half Jewish. I propose an 9/15 JONJ rating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.168.28.134 (talk) 00:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Why is this important enough to mention in "Early life"? It should be under "Personal life" as part of the Who Do You Think You Are? discussion.


 * The phrase "She does actually look and talks Jewish" is considered an ethnic insult by most US Jews. There is no Jewish look or speech pattern, because Jews have dispersed around the world. The traits the previous writer identifies as "Jewish" are probably from her German mother . Drbits (talk) 06:20, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Divorce date
Will the editor who keeps adding a divorce date for Kingston's marriage to Florian Haertel please stop. The date of the divorce is not confirmed. In the latest edit the sources added only state that "Kingston is ‘devastated’ at the collapse of her second marriage" (reported in October 2010) and "The couple parted four years ago" (reported in 2014). Neither of them explicitly provide a date for the divorce, just an approximate date for the breakdown of the marriage. There are other reports from that period that suggest they were still married at that time: Please stop jumping to conclusions about when she divorced based on reports dated roughly to the approximate time her marriage broke down. A divorce date should not be added unless it is accompanied by a source that explicitly discusses her divorce, rather than the breakdown of her marriage in general terms. Betty Logan (talk) 14:20, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * "Kingston’s 12-year marriage to husband Florian Haertel is ending in divorce, according to reports." (October 2010) – This seems to indicate they started divorce proceedings in 2010, not that they were divorced in 2010.
 * "She confirms recent reports that she has separated from her second husband, German journalist Florian Haertel, whom she married in 1998 ("I can't talk about that, but we have been apart for two years")." (reported June 2011) – Kingston does not confirm she is divorced. In fact this article implies they were still married of 2011 otherwise why would she say they are "apart" and not divorced?
 * "Is she now separated? “It’s not appropriate to ask me that..." (reported August 2011) – If Kingston was divorced this would have been a matter of public record and she would probably just confirm it.
 * "During her run in the show, she married German journalist Florian Haertel and had Salome; the couple have since separated." (reported 2013) – Again, separated, not divorced.


 * Alex Kingston married Ralph Fiennes September 1993 and they were divorced 28 October 1997


 * Alex Kingston married Florian Haertel 29 December 1998
 * Alex Kingston married Florian Haertel 29 December 1998

and they were divorced in 2010



Drbits (talk) 07:16, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
 * IMDB is user-edited like Wikipedia and is not a reliable source per WP:RS/IMDB. People can add incorrect information just like they do here. Betty Logan (talk) 16:26, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Twice now, has altered Kingtson's marriage listings to incorrectly state that Kingston divorced Florian Haertel in 2010. This is wrong. They only separated in 2010 and were still married as of 2011, at least according to the sources in the article. It is not known which year they divorced hence the note. Since Sebastian has not provided an edit summary on either occasion for this alteration it is difficult to understand why he is deliberately ignoring the note. This is besides the point, because the sources in the article only state that she and Haertel separated in 2010, and in reality she could have got divorced during any year between 2011 and 2015. If Sebastian wants to provide a date for the divorce then he will need a source to that effect. Betty Logan (talk) 16:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I am now sure that you have astigmatism, I added the  thing years ago and didn't check it until recently. It doesn't look nice, so I removed it. Removing the reason doesn't mean they are divorced. Note doesn't say anything about removing the "separated" word. Thanks for stealing my time to reply your nonsense. Sebastian James (talk) 18:50, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * By removing the explanation it appears the marriage ended in 2010. This is not true. The marriage almost certainly ended after 2010. The whole point of the  parameter in the marriage template is to be able clarify situations like this. Betty Logan (talk) 18:55, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with Betty Logan. It does make it look like they divorce in 2010. Also, saying it doesn't look nice is not a good reason to remove; sounds like WP:I don't like it. I've reverted the article to the status quo. Ted  Edwards  19:32, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:I don't like it is for "I", "me", "my" etc., and It doesn't look nice doesn't include these. What I actually meant is "m." is for married, but there is no "s." for "separated". Maybe someone can abbreviate both separated and annulled for the parameter? (Also there is a  above it, how come it looks like they divorced in 2010 while it doesn't even include "divorced"?) Sebastian James (talk) 19:40, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't think there is an accepted abbreviation for separated and annulled, so unfortunately we can't use one. I know there is a reason divorced, but readers assume that the dates are the marriage dates, so there is ambiguity. Also, removing something because you think it doesn't look good is basically saying the same as I don't like it, hence the link I gave you; it's not a good arguement Ted  Edwards  19:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)


 * The template is supposed to provide the date for the marriage, so it looks like the marriage ended in 2010. A marriage can end in several different ways: death, divorce or annulment. It cannot end in separation, so the date is technically incorrect. As you can see from the links I provide above Kingston was still married as of 2011, so if the divorce was finalised in 2011 or 2012 then that is the date that we would use in the template, not the date of the separation. If we are going to use the date of the separation then this needs to be clarified that it is not the actual year the marriage ended. Betty Logan (talk) 19:54, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It's probably better to clear up ambiguity by explicitly stating a reason in the template, especially if there's question over the exact date when the marriage ended. The other option would be to simply remove the marriage info from the infobox and explain this solely in prose.  Infoboxes aren't necessarily the best way to display all information. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:29, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I think this is a great example of where infoboxes fall down. Trouble is though is that if you remove the parameters they just get added back at some point, and if you remove the infobox you then turn it into an infobox turf war. As far as editing disputes go, that's a bit like going from Laser Quest to the Western Front. Betty Logan (talk) 05:19, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

I may return to this topic when I have more information. In the meantime I would like to draw attention to one of the many sources cited above (all of them British). The Evening Standard's GOLONDON article is dated 1 June 2011. In that, Alex Kingston is quoted as saying: "...we have been apart for two years." This would mean that she and Florian Haertel had separated by 1 June 2009 at the latest - not in 2010, as the amended Infobox now incorrectly states. Further on, the article says: "...they share equal custody of their 10-year-old daughter...". 'Share equal custody' is legal terminology, and it suggests that the couple had already divorced sometime before 1 June 2011. O Murr (talk) 23:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Legally separated couples can have—and do have—formal custody arrangements. If they were divorced this would have been a matter of public record and she probably would have just confirmed it, instead of saying they had been "apart for two years", which is a weird way of describing a divorce. It is certainly not a confirmation at any rate. I agree with you about the date, though: Kingston's comment would seem to imply they formally separated in 2009. But all of this is conjecture anyway; none of the sources actually confirm divorce, just a separation, and whatever the year of the divorce a source is needed to describe it in those specific terms instead of using words like "separated" and "apart". Betty Logan (talk) 00:14, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Please go to reference 26. That will take you to the UniCourt website. You will then have to type in JULIAN HAERTEL VS ALEXANDRA KINGSTON in capitals. You will see that JH sued AK for divorce in the Los Angeles Supreme Court on 30 October 2009. The result was: Case Status - Disposed - Judgement Entered. Will you now please correct the Infobox? O Murr (talk) 00:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

'Los Angeles Supreme Court' should be 'Los Angeles County Superior Courts'. O Murr (talk) 01:07, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

I also made a mistake when I typed Julian instead of Florian Haertel. I was excited by the discovery of an authorative source for the couple's divorce, and I also had some news about Julian Assange on my mind at the time. We all make mistakes. None of us is infallible. But I'm willing to acknowledge my mistakes and eager to correct them. Why can't you do the same? Are you waiting for the unfairly derided Sebastian James to correct your mistakes? Or for me? I don't know the current divorce law in California, but the divorce granted to Florian Haertel on 30 October 2009 may have been a decree nici with a decree absolute following some months later in 2010. That year - 2010 - is always given as the year of the couple's divorce on every site, good, bad, or indifferent, that I've seen which actually mentions their divorce. It's almost certainly correct. At any rate, the year was either 2009 or 2010. It couldn't have been later. O Murr (talk) 07:34, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * What mistake exactly do you want me to acknowledge? I have never edited the date, I merely clarified that the date was for the separation, not for the divorce. I have already acknowledged in my reply to you above that the date of the separation was most likely 2009 based on the existing sources, and the new source you have found confirms that. However, your source makes this a moot point because it clearly states in the docket entries that the divorce was finalized on March 27, 2013. Since you are not legally divorced until the judge enters a judgment in a divorce case then obviously the year of divorce is 2013, not 2009 or even 2010, and that is the date that should go in the infobox. If you want me to go ahead and make the necessary corrections based on this new source I am more than happy to go ahead and do that. It's a good find by the way. Betty Logan (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I intend to return to this (unhappy) matter sometime in the near future. (As you must know, Sebastian James has already returned and taken some action.) I do now have reliable information on California divorce law.


 * https://www.hg.org/divorce-law-california.html

No doubt, in your endless determination to grasp at straws, you will try to argue that the state's laws on divorce may have been different ten years ago - but without attempting to provide any evidence that they were. But please note the line: " After filing for divorce, there is a mandatory six month waiting period before the divorce may become final ". Six months from 30 October 2009 is 1 May 2010. Happy Xmas to us all! O Murr (talk) 22:58, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

For some reason, that reference doesn't seem to have been saved. So here it is again: https://www.hg.org/divorce-law-california.html#1 O Murr (talk) 23:04, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The operative word there being "may". A mandatory wait of six months does not mean all divorces take exactly six months; it means there is a minimum period of six months before the divorce can be legally finalized. Some divorces can take months, others can take years. You are even denying the clear evidence of your own source. You can see from the dockets that the judgment in the case was pending in December 2012. The "notice of entry judgment" (which finalizes the divorce) was issued March 27, 2013. You can find out exactly what the terms mean here: https://info.legalzoom.com/entry-judgment-divorce-california-mean-25066.html. I appreciate the source you found because it clearly resolves the date issue, but it's time to put this debate to bed and move on. Betty Logan (talk) 23:28, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I knew it would happen. I hoped I wouldn't have to come back here before the New Year. Look at this page on your own source: https://info.legalzoom.com/correct-date-divorce-date-filing-date-judgement-divorce-25039.html " ... some states apply a waiting period before the divorce is final -- sometimes six months later." Not three-plus years - six months. The date issue - which you started - is not 'clearly resolved'. O Murr (talk) 07:56, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

And - finally for now, I hope - here is another entry from the legalzoom site. I am going to quote in full from the Shortcuts section: "A unique aspect of California's law code allows you to become divorced even if you and your spouse have not yet settled all issues of property and custody. You can "bifurcate" your divorce. The court will terminate your marital status at the six-month mark or whenever you request it after the six months have expired, and leave other issues open so you and your spouse can litigate or continue to negotiate them." That would explain the 'dockets' that appear on the UniCourt Haertel-Kingston divorce page. They are records of post-divorce litigations by both parties. None of them refers to the final termination of the marriage, because it had been terminated already.
 * https://info.legalzoom.com/long-divorced-california-20568.html

O Murr (talk) 08:55, 22 December 2018 (UTC)


 * All this is "may" or "can". Just because the marriage may/can be legally dissolved six months after the filing date does not mean it is. You can pull all the court proceedings from the actual court records: https://www.lacourt.org/CaseSummary/UI/casesummary.aspx?caseNumber=BD513924. Now, you can see from the proceedings that there was no court action at all in 2010 except for settling a custody order. Divorce proceedings commenced December 7, 2011. This is completely consistent with Kingston's quote above in 2011 that she and Haertel had been "apart" for two years. The case itself was settled in January 24, 2013. On March 27, 2013, both the Declaration of Default and the "Entry of Judgment" were filed and entered. According to this California divorce laywer "You will not be divorced until the default judgment is processed by the court. Once it is processed, you should receive a copy of the judgment and a form entitled Notice of Entry of Judgment." This almost certainly confirms that Kingston and Haertel were divorced in March 2013, even though proceedings continued into April. As of August 2014, Kingston was referring to Haertel as her ex-husband, not somebody she is "apart" from. I am hoping this will resolve the matter. However, if this is still not sufficient for you then I recommend that you file a community-wide WP:Request for comment. Betty Logan (talk) 18:32, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Verify: Alex Kingston pictured with her sister Nicola?

 * https://canyousonicme.tumblr.com/post/35625900225/alex-kingston-pictured-with-her-younger-sister
 * Alex Kingston pictured with her younger sister (Nicola?). The photo was a promotional release for her edition of Who Do You Think You Are?
 * http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01mxvn2

2601:646:201:57F0:7BCC:4158:8FFD:1E07 (talk) 19:26, 28 June 2024 (UTC)