Talk:Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn

Biography assessment rating comment
WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 01:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

London, 'where'?
Comparing London, Ontario with London, England isn't accurate. Why? London, England happens to also be the capital city of the entire Kingdom (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in this time period). GoodDay (talk) 18:05, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And? It's still "Ottawa, Ontario," not "Ottawa, Canada," just as it's "Washington, District of Columbia," and not "Washington, United States of America." I get that England is not the United Kingdom, but I don't think there's anything in "London, England," that would indicate otherwise. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  18:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * This impresson given though, is that Art was born a English prince, instead of a British prince. By saying born in England, you're excluding, Scotland, Wales & Ireland. GoodDay (talk) 18:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * London isn't in Scotland, Wales, or Ireland. And I think the sentence in the preceeding paragraph that spells out how he was a "member of the shared British and Saxe-Coburg and Gotha royal family" dispels any confusion about which country (countries, actually) he was a prince of.
 * I personally think it adds a redundancy, but the sentence in question could possibly read: "Arthur was born to Queen Victoria in the British capital, London, England..." I'd prefer it didn't, though. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  18:23, 28 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I've a better solution. Let's follow what is done on Victoria's other children's bios. At the birth, only London is mentioned. GoodDay (talk) 18:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * (again) Possible. Though, the preceeding sentence says he served as the Governor General of Canada and there's a London in that country, too. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  18:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I've wiped out the sentence, as Arthur's birth is already mentiond in the second section. GoodDay (talk) 18:25, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't like that at all. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  18:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You can revert if ya want (I've reached my limit anyway). But, this is how it's done for Victoria's other children's bios. It doesn't read well to have his birthplace mentioned twice in the intro & the second section. Remember, he's Victoria's child 'first' & the Canadian Governor General thing comes latter. GoodDay (talk) 18:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Huh? Um, anyway, the lead is supposed to be a summary of the article content; it's okay to have in it some of the info that follows in the first section. I guess his place of birth doesn't have to be mentioned in the lead; but, you removed from there all signs that the man was ever born, which I think was a significant enough event to warrant a place in this article's opening. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  18:36, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Now that you mentioned it, he does look very much alive in those pictures. Anyways, your addition is great, are we in agreement on the current content? GoodDay (talk) 18:40, 28 November 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, we're in agreement. GoodDay (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Ribbon bars
The image depicting the Duke's ribbon bars is without any sort of citation. The Garter, Thistle and St Patrick are/were never worn as ribbons. I haven't been able to find much in the way of contemporary photographs in service dress, but there's one here in 1921 and here in 1929 both showing ribbons on three rows. Opera hat (talk) 05:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * There are citations affirming he received the honours. There are images of ribbon bars for those honours. Where is the proof that there were no ribbon bars for the Orders of the Garter, Thistle, and St. Patrick? -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  05:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Royal Navy regulations state "when ribbons are worn apart from the orders, decorations and medals themselves a ribbon is worn for each medal, etc except the Garter, Thistle and St Patrick." RAF regulations say "these Orders are not worn in miniature and the ribands of the Orders are not worn with undress uniform". I haven't found an online version of the Queen's Regulations for the Army, but it will say the same thing. Here's a close-up photograph of the Duke from c. 1904 and though it's in black-and-white you can see the first ribbon is a single colour (the Order of the Bath) and the second has stripes at the edges (the Order of the Star of India). Though he was a Knight of the Garter, the Thistle and St Patrick at this time he is not wearing them as ribbons. Opera hat (talk) 05:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Other issues: the VD and the TD, as decorations, should go before all medals. Commemorative medals (i.e. the ones for jubilees and coronations) come after campaign medals. The ribbon shown for the Order of the British Empire is that of the civil division; I assume the Duke was a member of the military division which has a central silver stripe. The badge of the Royal Victorian Chain would never be worn other than with full medals, not ribbons. And what purpose is the image intended to serve, anyway? To illustrate how he actually wore his ribbons? Because if so, it should match the layout given in photos like those I linked to above. I'd say it would be easier to delete it altogether, and if pictures of the medal ribbons are needed, to include these in the list of honours further down. Opera hat (talk) 00:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The Orders of Wear would indicate that some of what you say is wrong. Regardless, the ribbons are shown on every Canadian governor general's page; they're meant as an illustration, though not neccessarily an exact representation of what ribbons would be worn on the individual's uniform. I don't care what's done with them, either way; but, whatever is done, should be made so on all the articles in the series. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  14:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hah, that's a fair cop. Not knowing the order of wear by heart I assumed that being called decorations they were decorations and not medals! With regard to whether they should be there or not: I had been looking at the article more as the biography of a British prince than of a Canadian governor-general (WP:BIAS in action, what?) so didn't think to check the articles on other governors-general for comparison; I'd assumed they were there because he was a soldier. Opera hat (talk) 21:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Here's a photograph of the Duke's frock-coat showing his medal ribbons. I'm having a bit of trouble identifying some of them - help would be appreciated. Opera hat (talk) 16:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Reverts of 2 March 2011
Leonie, Lady Leslie is correct because she was the wife of a baronet with no title in her own right. Lady Leonie Leslie would imply she was the daughter of a Duke, Marquess or Earl, which she was not. Duke of Connaught and Strathearn was a peerage and not a "regnal title" - its holder reigned over neither Connaught nor Strathearn. Opera hat (talk) 23:50, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I apologise; I was wrong in believing the wife of a knight had the title preceed her first name, as with her husband; i.e. Sir Fred Thompson and Lady Mary Thompson. However, this would indicate that "Leonie, Lady Leslie]] should simply be shown as "Lady Leslie]]"; unless she was a divorcee. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  00:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right; she would have been known socially as "Lady Leslie" and not "Leonie, Lady Leslie". But then the subject of this article would have been known socially as "HRH The Duke of Connaught", not "Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn". When referring to one of many people who had the same title, including the first name makes it clearer who is meant, particularly as she doesn't have an article of her own. Opera hat (talk) 00:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I've just remembered that another form you sometimes see is "Lady (Leonie) Leslie". Would that be better? I'd say it looks a bit ugly for an article title, even if it's only a redirect. Opera hat (talk) 21:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Styles and titles
I've replaced the tags on the section purporting to list his full style and title as governor-general. Though he may have held all the titles and honours listed, and these may be cited elsewhere in the article, there is no evidence provided that they were ever listed in full in the manner given, either in English or in French, so to say this was his "full style and title" falls foul of WP:SYNTH. I have no idea why the account of his marriage in the London Gazette is given as a source - this is from years before he became Governor-General, so is useless as evidence of his style and title while so serving. Opera hat (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have a proposal? Or just a complaint? -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  15:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes: remove the whole section. His various honours and titles are listed with their dates in the section below; there's no need for a recitation of those he held at one particular point in his career. Opera hat (talk) 15:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And that is to be done for all biographies of Canadian governors general? It is my feeling that the full titles are noteworthy and certainly guide readers and researchers on the order in which the individual's titles, ranks, and honours were listed. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  16:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Except that there is no source for this order. Opera hat (talk) 18:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You mentioned uniformity with articles on other Governors-General above when I suggested removing the ribbon bar image. Should both issues be raised at a central talk page like Talk:List of Governors General of Canada? Opera hat (talk) 18:12, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know. I don't feel there's any particular problem that needs to be raised. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  17:19, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Nae danger. I haven't been comparing this article against other articles on Canadian Governors-General, so really all I wanted to do was find out if there might have been some prior-agreed consensus on the format for them. I'm now assuming there isn't. Opera hat (talk) 23:53, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The lists of honours/places named after him/etc are quite long; maybe they should be split into another article like these. Opera hat (talk) 23:12, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Styles and titles (again)
I've just moved a list of the Duke's titles and honours into article space, so I've replaced that section of this article with a link there. The new article includes all the referenced information from this article. Opera hat (talk) 14:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Interesting use of the word "devotion"
Since it usually means steadfast and singular, it's interesting that this prince could remain devoted to his wife while "maintaining a liaison" with another woman. I'd think it would be best modified by an "apparently" (He was "apparently devoted" to his wife).LéVeillé 02:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Heir (presumptive) to the throne of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
See .--The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 18:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080917135535/http://www.maritimematters.com:80/union-castle.html to http://www.maritimematters.com/union-castle.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:04, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Southern District
A a recent edit has the edit summary: "Southern Command (United Kingdom) has "Southern District]] nowhere in it".

The sentence that he/she edited was originally:
 * He went on to be General Officer Commanding Southern District, at Portsmouth, in September 1890.

According to the cited source, the command was called: It seems that some names may have overlapped in use.
 * South-Western District until the 1860s
 * Southern District from the 1860s to 1905
 * Southern Command from 1901 until 1972.

If you look at the article that was Wikilinked in the editor's edit summary: Southern Command (United Kingdom), it uses the term "Southern District".-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Mm. So it does. My mistake. -- ₪   MIESIANIACAL  22:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 03:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn. 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/20080918224019/http://www.allatsea.co.za/cems/anglomemorial.htm to http://www.allatsea.co.za/cems/anglomemorial.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071008154156/http://www.cthighlanders.co.za/cth/history.htm to http://www.cthighlanders.co.za/cth/history.htm

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) 16:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Wilhelm II - Godfather ?
How could Wilhelm II be godfather of born 9 years later? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbd147 (talk • contribs) 02:57, 24 October 2021 (UTC)


 * You are right as it appears to be William I, German Emperor, reports say he visited his sister the Empress of Russia before the baptism, which would be Alexandra Feodorovna (Charlotte of Prussia) in 1850. Article corrected. MilborneOne (talk) 07:48, 24 October 2021 (UTC)