Talk:Lord Alfred Douglas

General point
I feel that the article very quickly veers off into multiple side issues involving other family members. Not that those are not interesting, but I found it annoying. Maybe subtitles would help, so one can skim over those paragraphs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.228.58 (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Untitled
I believe that later in life Douglas became a Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer. If someone knows something substantive about this, it should probably be added to the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:15, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * Douglas translated The Protocols of the Elders of Zion into English in 1919, one of the first translations of that notorious anti-Semitic piece of propaganda. This is documented in Norman Cohn's "Warrant for Genocide".
 * No, he did not. --JHumphries (talk) 18:08, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Not a Nazi (sympathiser though, in 1941 he published a sonnet in praise of Churchill, and wrote a letter to the Times advocating the takeover of the ports in Eire for the war (Murray page 317)! Hugo999 10:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Bosie
I believe that "Bosie" should link here, as those searching for a clarification from Oscar Wilde's letter will most likely search this term first. CaveatLector 04:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Wilco. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

KBE
I have deleted the reference to Douglas being a KBE, which was incorrect. Jason Boyd 23:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Added Bibliography & Secondary Sources
I also added some material to the entry and clarifed some parts.Jason Boyd 13:44, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Douglas and boys
Douglas' tastes were similar to those of Wilde, as attested by various sources ("When they did become lovers, Oscar and Bosie flaunted their desire for working-class boys, entertaining them everywhere from the Savoy Hotel to the Cafe Royal." Charles Kaiser in the Washington Post). Thus he has as much right to be considered a pederastic lover as Wilde. Haiduc 02:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd kind of like a better source than that, but if you want to add the category back go ahead. It would be nice if some of this was discussed in the article. -- JJay 02:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * André Gide talk about it in his books "Si le grain ne meurt" and "Oscar wilde, in memoriam". I talk about Douglas as a "Tyrant", he tells about some pederastic adventures of Douglas and how he was jealous. He's outraged by the "lies" Douglas spread about Wilde. dakk2 18:58, 28 october 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.48.213.26 (talk)

Sectioning
I think the recent retitling of sections and breakdown into small sections (the edit also makes a couple of improvements in the text) is ill-conceived and the names used are basically ill-chosen (too informal). I won't revert them singlehandedly, but would support reverting at least the bulk of them. Other opinions would be welcome. - Jmabel | Talk 06:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Birthday!
He was born today, congratulations, mate! He would have been 136 today, way to go=)) --Shandristhe azylean 12:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Name
I looked vainly for information in the article about the peerage, or lack of it. A clear sentence or two would suffice, and the following points here about "The" are hardly the point. Most people would imagine that Douglas would have inherited a peerage, and would have therefore been a Peer. Not the case. This was a courtesy title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.228.58 (talk) 15:55, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

We now start the article by referring to him as "The Lord Alfred Bruce Douglas". I have almost never seen this form used for him or any other British nobleman outside of a court protocol context. Has this honestly become our style (so to speak)? Or was this one zealous editor whom no one bothered to revert? - Jmabel | Talk 05:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * He wasn't The Lord in any event. - Kittybrewster 09:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Similarly, throughout the article we are calling him "Lord Alfred". I am reasonably sure this goes against Wikipedia style. - Jmabel | Talk 05:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * A style that I wholly deplore though this is not the place to argue the point. - Kittybrewster 09:07, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It's nothing to do with Wikipedia style. Peers are correctly referred to as, eg. "The Lord Smith".  However Bosey was not a peer.  He was merely the son of a Marquess, but not the first-born and hence was never in line to inherit the marquessate.  He had the courtesy title "Lord Alfred Douglas".  It does not mean that he was actually a "lord".  The word "The" is completely wrong.  JackofOz 09:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Disagree "merely", but otherwise totally agree. - Kittybrewster 09:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Erm, that was me. Sorry. "The Lord" is correct (have a look at Debrett's Correct Form if you don't believe me, or references in the Court Circular to "the Lord Nicholas Windsor" and "the Lord Frederick Windsor"), but I'm quite happy to accept that it's not our style. But "Lord Alfred" seems perfectly okay. We are allowed to use "Lord John", "Sir John", etc., rather than just using the surname. But I must admit, I changed most of them to "Lord Alfred" as a reaction against the use of "Bosie", which I feel is a totally inappropriate and far too familiar way for an encyclopaedia to refer to him. I'm quite happy for "Douglas" to be used as long as that isn't. Proteus (Talk) 09:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that Bosie is unaccceptable. Lord Alfred is fine. DCF (page 46) says re ygr son of a Duke or Marquess "there is no authority for the prefix of 'The' before his name. - Kittybrewster 09:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * But still uses it... (And there won't be any authority &mdash; it's a courtesy title, not a legal one, so customary usage is all that really counts. And the usage of the Court Circular is enough for me.) Proteus (Talk) 09:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Uses it where? - Kittybrewster 10:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * When it gives the style of a younger son of a Duke or Marquess:
 * Envelope
 * Formal and Social    The Lord Edward FitzGerald
 * Proteus (Talk) 13:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * My copy is 1971 and says Lord Edward Fitzgerald - Kittybrewster 14:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, that explains it. I have the 2002 edition. Proteus (Talk) 14:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Interesting thought contributed by a friend to me today. "The" is applied where there are no   prospects of promotion. e.g. Marquess of Tavistock is not "The" because he stands to inherit the Dukedom of Bedford. His younger brother however would be "the" Lord (Tom) Russell because he does not stand to inherit his father's dukedom. Apparently this statement is made in Lady Colin Campbell’s Guide to Being a Modern Lady. - Kittybrewster 19:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

This isn't a Court Circular, it's an encyclopedia. We should follow the usage of the biographers we use as sources; and I would be astounded if that usage were not "Lord Alfred Bruce Douglas", with some omitting Bruce. Go ahead; astound me. Septentrionalis 15:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I concur. Standard usage in scholarly works for the younger sons of English, Scottish, Irish, GB, and UK dukes and marquesses is "Lord Firstname Lastname" (without "The" as appears in the Court Circular). In the Dictionary of National Biography article, after the first line, he is always referred to as "Douglas" and therefore I have followed suit and changed subsequent references in the wiki-article. Noel S McFerran 16:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I disapprove. - Kittybrewster 16:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't see that it makes much of a difference whether "Douglas" or "Lord Alfred" is used - both are appropriate. "Lord Alfred," I would suggest, should only be preferred in instances where he has to be distinguished from other people with the surname "Douglas," even though it was likely used fairly frequently at the time - Lord John Russell, for instance, was often just called "Lord John," even in French diplomatic correspondence! Oddly, the French incorrectly call Lord Augustus Loftus "Lord Loftus." john k 17:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

FYI, the dedication page of the 1894 first English edition of Wilde's Salome read thus: (my bolding) --Francis Schonken 18:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Tbh I don't have any doubt you can find both forms with a little effort as it is one of those usages that has drifted with fashon. I prefer the use without the 'the' as it strictly refers to holders of substantive titles in law. However it's not an issue I can really get too worked up about. Alci12 21:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I would suggest to avoid "the" because it is a bit pretentious. john k 04:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Pretentious, perhaps, but that opinion is POV, no? I say the whole point is for the articles to be scrupulously correct. Mowens35 21:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Scrupulous correctness, I believe, omits "the" in this context, although protocol would allow it if he were alive and one were being introduced as he entered a room. - Jmabel | Talk 00:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * If this is correct, then it should be cited on usage of titles page for future reference. Mowens35 21:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I wonder why Douglas in the introduction is called a 'minor Uranian' poet. I think 'minor' is condescending, especially if you compare with the other poets called 'minor' in Wikipedia. There are dozens of editions of Douglas' poetry, he is still in print and admired as a poet by many a critic. Also, whereas he certainly has written Uranian poetry, and his work has been included in books about Uranian poetry, Douglas' work certainly was not limited to that epithet, as you probably will concede when reading his poems (even if they may not be to your poetical taste). Moreover, he was not only a poet but also a translator and a prose writer. So, I would suggest to change the introduction to: 'was a writer and translator who is best remembered as the intimate friend of the writer Oscar Wilde.' Soczyczi 13:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * From my perspective, the dub 'minor' has less to do with the quality of his writing and more to do with his standing. Douglas rightly appears in any consideration of the Uranian writers, but his standing has never warranted (and probably will never warrant) the label 'major'.  He is a fascination and an appreciated figure by many readers, but even Timothy d'Arch Smith would consider him 'minor' (as opposed to 'major'), as he does all those he considers in Love in Earnest.  Perhaps it could be phrased better as 'Douglas was a minor poet specializing in Uranian verse'.  Gerard Manley Hopkins is a 'major' poet (and retains that standing); but, Douglas just does not warrant that dub, no matter how much you and I might appreciate him, biographically and literarily. Welland R 20:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I never said Douglas is a major poet, nor a major Uranian poet. I don’t know what you mean with his ‘standing’. Of course Douglas is a Uranian poet. But not in the first place. Certainly Douglas is not to be introduced as a 'minor poet specializing in Uranian verse'. Why do you want to designate him like that? I think that’s condescending. It’s a value judgment, your value judgment. Alfred Douglas was a poet, a translator and a prose writer, better known as the intimate friend of Oscar Wilde. When you describe his poetry, you can say that he composed Uranian verse, among other subjects. Maybe you can cite a choir of critics or literary historians (Smith for instance).


 * But just look at the ‘minor poets’ in Wikipedia: [Chandos Leigh] was Lord Byron's fag at Harrow School and 'inherited some of his master's poetical talent'. He was an author and minor poet. He dined together with Lord Byron on the evening before Byron left England for Europe in April 1816. Henry Bellamann. Miles Coverdale, Plotius Tucca… That’s quite another level I think. And if you are using the Latin designation of a ‘minor poeta’, I’d like a definition first. Soczyczi 01:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not suggesting that Douglas should be labeled either 'a minor Uranian poet' or 'a minor poet specializing in Uranian verse' (I was only attempting to find a way of making the first more palatable). As for 'standing', I only meant that a 'major' poet is one who is likely to appear in general poetry anthologies, to be critically engaged, and to be taught in university lessons.  A poet like Auden or Hopkins, etc., are 'major' in this way, and have been so for a length of time which suggests that this is no mere literary fashion.  Douglas's poetry is unlikely to appear in a general poetry anthology, to be analyzed in literary criticism, or to be taught in an academic setting -- hence, he does not have sufficient 'standing' to be considered anything other than 'minor'.  Personally, I do not believe he warrants this lack of critical attention, but you and I do not constitute a sufficient voice to change this.  Perhaps someday he will be frequently reproduced, studied, and taught.  Personally, I think your phrasing is judicious, and I will change the entry to the following, which I hope you find agreeable:  'Alfred Douglas was a poet, a translator and a prose writer, better known as the intimate friend of Oscar Wilde.  Much of his early poetry was Uranian in theme, though he tended, later in life, to distance himself from both Wilde's influence and his Uranian verse'. Welland R 21:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

PD image
Available.  Ty  08:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Negative Image of Douglas'
The article gives a very negative image of the Douglas family. Unfaily, there's no mention of the achievements of later family members, in Australia, who were well known in medicine and the law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.141.141 (talk) 06:07, 27 November 2010 (UTC) pene gordo

Protocols of the Elders of Zion
This article says that Douglas "published" the Protocols and cites Murray as a source. I'm reading this book now, there is only one mention of the Protocols and it doesn;t say Douglas published them, only that he read them and believed them. If I don't find another source for this I'm going to revise accordingly.Shrikeangel (talk) 01:44, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

The sole mention of the Protocols in Murray (p. 227 of the hardback) is "Douglas was convinced by such stories as the 'Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion', which confirmed his and the majority of the British public's belief that Jews took positions of power and corrupted the British system for their own benefit." Nothing is in that book about him "publishing" them in 1919. So the citation in the article that references Murray's book in support of that is in error and we need a proper one. I see in the beginning of the talk page a claim that Douglas published them which uses another reference. I can't put in a citation I haven't checked, so I'll see if I can check it out. Until then I think the claim should have "citation needed" and I'm revising accordingly.Shrikeangel (talk) 11:59, 7 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Half a year later, no evidence has been brought forward. Just two editors that are intent on branding Bosie as an antisemite. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 01:37, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Bosie's activities at "Plain English" mag are now documented.--Galassi (talk) 02:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Most notable of that weekly was the accusation that Churchill would have plotted to murder Kitchener, which led to the libel suit already mentioned in the article. If he believed that, of course he also believed the Protocols, it is insignificant in comparison. And category:Antisemitism is not for biographical articles anyway. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Douglas's Plain English (from No 20, 20 November 1920) advertised George Shanks's "The Jewish Peril" version of the Protocols published by The Britons, and Douglas and the magazine referred/defended the Protocols, — Preceding unsigned comment added by JHumphries (talk • contribs) 18:07, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Plain English
As the contributor to the Plain English section I feel I should just make a personal comment for the benefit of others who may not have the same access to material as I. No one should be in any doubt as to the content of Plain English. With the exception of the very first issues it is often literally page after page (but not exclusively) with some comment or allegation about the Jews, or specific Jews. Douglas in "A Personal Statement By Lord Alfred Douglas", Issue 50, 18 June 1921, would state that Plain English had been "my own personal organ of opinion" and he indicates the intention was to "put down Lloyd George and his Jewish paymasters, and bring back into power the old revived Conservative party, which has so long languished in impotent slavery", and I would suggest that is what needs to be understood. What is difficult to add to the article without the risk of WP:ORIGINAL, is that Plain English and the activities of Alan_Percy,_8th_Duke_of_Northumberland needs to be considered in the context of the British right and their reaction to the Lloyd_George_ministry with its dealings with Sinn Fein and the League of Nations, and the seeming destruction of the British empire in Egypt and India, to which they would then focus/blame on various Jewish individuals, and Jews in general. There is no reason to perceive Douglas as some sort of proto-nazi thug or what have you, there is every reason to perceive that he hated Lloyd George and the Daily Mail. --JHumphries (talk) 07:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Naples - where are you?
Naples and Paris

This meeting was disapproved of by the friends and families of both men. During the later part of 1897, Wilde and Douglas lived together in Rouen, but for financial pressures and other personal reasons, they separated. Wilde lived the remainder of his life primarily in Paris, and Douglas returned to England in late 1898.

The period when the two men lived in Rouen would later become quite controversial. Wilde claimed that Douglas had offered a home, but had no funds or ideas. When Douglas eventually did gain funds from his late father's estate, he refused to grant Wilde a permanent allowance, although he did give him occasional handouts. When Wilde died in 1900, he was still officially bankrupt and relatively impoverished. Douglas served as chief mourner, although there reportedly was an altercation at the gravesite between him and Robbie Ross. This struggle would preview the later litigations between the two former lovers of Oscar Wilde. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon Davies WMUK (talk • contribs) 22:38, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Lede doesn't summarise article
The second half of the lede refers to his poetry and his political stance. These are not referenced in the article. Valetude (talk) 21:43, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lord Alfred Douglas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080320041127/http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Fdixie.htm to http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Fdixie.htm
 * Added tag to http://www.xreferplus.com/entry.jsp?xrefid=7345683

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

A lot of crap writing
A lot of crap writing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:D002:ADA1:8573:E170:9858:6076 (talk) 06:40, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

True. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:D483:ECC1:C01:F8A7:F34E:5F7F (talk) 09:35, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Please read Oscar Wilde and Myself by Alfred Douglas
If some part of the book might have been written by someone else, the general theme that Alfred was some kind of romantic lover of Oscar Wilde might need to be re-discussed. Maybe the whole idea is some kind of Irish conspiracy.

Homophobic revisions
most recent revisions need reversing, especially the opening "raging devotee to the love that dare not speak it's name " 2001:9E8:31CF:4000:15BC:BDE5:D3E6:1ACC (talk) 22:41, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for noticing this vandalism, I have reverted it. DuncanHill (talk) 22:53, 14 February 2024 (UTC)