Talk:Charles Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley

Untitled
I am not in principle against turning this article into a redirect. Actually, I have some sympathy for the view that there are too many articles on royal children who have done nothing notable except being born. Nevertheless, a decision to run an article into a redirect is almost a deletion, such a decision should not be taken without discussion, either by consensus or a clear decision at e.g. AFD level. PatGallacher (talk) 16:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not bolshy, and support Jimmy Wales in his belief that pages listing the aristocracy are important and valuable as the individuals are inheritantly socially notable, but I believe children and the unachieving should be simply listed on the overview page for the noble title. e.g. in this case, a listing on the page for Earl of Snowdon. Charles to date has only been a page to the monarch. So a full page entry is somewhat ridiculous. Engleham (talk) 13:34, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Serena Stanhope
Considering that the policy is to use the mother's maiden name in the info box, how should it be addressed? At the time of her marriage to David Armstrong-Jones, she was known as Hon. Serena Stanhope; but since her father succeeded to his earldom, she is technically entitled to the style "Lady Serena Stanhope". For the moment, I've changed it to "Rt. Hon. Serena Stanhope" to "Hon. Serena Stanhope", as she was never entitled to the former style. What does everyone think? ~ Iamthecheese44 (talk) 06:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)