Contents

Talk:Jewels of Elizabeth II: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 14:59, 29 April 2011

	Jewels of Elizabeth II has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassessit.
Article milestones Date Process Result October 22, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 16, 2008.

British Royalty GA‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty articles GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Can we use a better image for the Vladimir? this is a bit more detailed; perhaps it could be cropped to remove the overly Canadian elements as well as make it a bit smaller. Thoughts? — [ roux ] [x] 13:52, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree but it's copyrighted. It's a lovely photo though! ;) We're generally only allowed to use copyrighted media when there is no other option and it is vital to the understanding of the subject. :( Best, --Cameron* 13:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well.. my issue is that it's basically impossible to see any detail in the B&W photo. Let me see if I can find something free. — [ roux ] [x] 14:03, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck. Npg.org.uk (national portrait gallery), vam.ac.uk (victoria and albert museum), claim copyright on images older than 300 years!! On top of that they display low pixel versions so you can't even use them under "fair use". --Cameron* 14:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gahh.. I wish we could use this!!! What are the rules on photos from royalcollection.org.uk? — [ roux ] [x] 14:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found an email address for the Royal Collection... here's hoping! — [ roux ] [x] 14:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They're just as bad. And it takes weeks for them to reply! The last time I was refused they told be "Website rights are usually only granted for educational establishments or museums or galleries where the works are being shown."

PS: You can always add links to the external links section if you don't get permission. --Cameron* 14:13, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though not strictly pertinent to the main article many of the images have notable characters in them, such as the first Duke of Wellington (the godfather of the child in the picture) on the first picture of the page. Should these be added to the captions? 129.67.17.233 (talk) 17:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a tough call. Most of me says no, as the focus is really on the jewellery. Part of me says yes, on general wikisurfing principles. — [ roux ] [x] 17:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I contemplated adding Image:Victoria in her Coronation.jpg because Victoria was a great contributer to the collection and is seen wearing the George IV diadem. But a) we already have an image of the diadem and b) the article has quite a few images. I suppose it could be added to the feud section if one wished. ;) --Cameron* 11:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think Vicky's picture is the better one for the Diadem.. Actually on second thought, it's a tossup, and we already have Old Vic in the lead. (and my goodness, I'd never noticed how much Margaret and Elizabeth are the spitting image of Louise before...) — [ roux ] [x] 11:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No estimates of the value of the jewels come at anywhere near £1000 trillion, and ten times this would be the entire GDP of the UK for 5 millenniums assuming it was at the current level throughout that time. Anyone got a good reliable estimate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.243.80 (talk) 20:58, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Marina was presented with a tiara from the Lord Mayor and citizens of London. It was presented to her as a wedding gift and was passed down through her family. Her daughter Princess Alexandra wore the tiara to her wedding and it is now in the possession of Princess Michael of Kent, NOT Queen Elizabeth II. The tiara mentioned here incorrectly, which was her mothers Grand Duchess Elena Vladimirovna of Russia, was passed down to her other daughter, which you can clearly see she is wearing in her wedding photo Princess Elizabeth of Greece and Denmark..etc. That Romanov tiara is now in the possession of Archduchess Helene of Austria, daughter of Princess Elizabeth of Greece and Denmark and her husband, Carl Theodor, Count of Toerring-Jettenbach. Duchess of Kent tiara The information comes from this site and another source listed here; this excerpt is from the Orient-Express Magazine-Volume 14, published in 1997, "On her marriage to the Duke of Kent in 1934, Princess Marina of Greece wore a diamond tiara, right, which was a wedding gift from lite City of London and was almost identical to the George III fringe tiara, later worn by the Princess Elizabeth" (later Queen Elizabeth). -- Lady Meg (talk) 21:07, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please tidy up link and add more information as it becomes known. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.135.176 (talk) 14:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]