Talk:Susan Cullen-Ward

Untitled
What surname should she have held upon her marriage? This should be in the article. It is strange that the Australian government would issue her a passport in her maiden surname, though cite a.k.a. Queen Susan; did she keep her maiden name? These and other questions remain unanswered and underdeveloped in this article.Mowens35 22:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


 * When she died she was referred to in official press releases as HM Queen Susan I Zog. That may be of help.--Couter-revolutionary 16:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * "Official press releases" - official in what sense? Who were they released by? By any chance was it by her own family / retainers / Albanian royalists? If so that is of no help whatsoever. Saddam Hussein identified himself as "President of the Republic of Iraq" when he crawled out of a foxhole under gunpoint ... you would call him President anymore though. Self-proclaimed titles aren't necessarily generally accepted. In fact they generally aren't. --SandyDancer 16:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The press release was written by the former royal family's secretariat. Don't get your knickers into a twist. Her titles are given credit (and discredit) in the article. Let's move on.Mowens35 16:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Quite, I was just about to say this. The point is she was known as Zog, this was her surname. Her family are best placed to know this, I do believe.  If, SandyDancer, you had read the discussion you would know it wasn't about her titles.--Couter-revolutionary 16:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Mea Culpa --SandyDancer 16:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Quite alright.--Couter-revolutionary 16:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Why have you repeatedly written "claimed to be" descended from Edward I? I have seen the family tree which states it in Burke's Royal Families of the World.  I ask, do you dispute Burke's, specialist genealogists, ability to resarch a family tree?--Couter-revolutionary 23:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * "...claimed to be descended from Edward I of England and Charlemagne". Oh, only?


 * Look, quit sputtering so much. Give us the page number re Edward I and we'll put it in the footnotes. Until I have proof (and the page number), it's "claimed" .. please, think like an editor, not like a fan.Mowens35 00:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Please do not be so rude. I am thinking like an editor and you should have good faith. I shall get the page number for you presently. --Couter-revolutionary 00:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Incorrectly proclaimed King
 * For you to say this implies your PoV that you think he should not have been proclaimed as such. When they did it, they did not do it with the mistaken belief he could enter Albania and rule, it was a formality a lot of Royals in exile go through. That is not to say I don't believe he is entitled to be King, but we shan't get into that.  As opposed ot incorrect perhaps we could say "ceremonially" &c.--Couter-revolutionary 00:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)