Contents

Talk:King George VI Memorial Chapel

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the King George VI Memorial Chapel article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

King George VI Memorial Chapel has been listed as one of the Art and architecture 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 reassess it. Review: December 19, 2023. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Architecture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Berkshire Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Berkshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Berkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BerkshireWikipedia:WikiProject BerkshireTemplate:WikiProject BerkshireBerkshire articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. British Royalty Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Cemeteries Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cemeteries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cemeteries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CemeteriesWikipedia:WikiProject CemeteriesTemplate:WikiProject CemeteriesCemeteries articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Death Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. England Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Historic sites Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from King George VI Memorial Chapel appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 October 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that Queen Elizabeth II wanted the King George VI Memorial Chapel to hold the remains of three British monarchs and their consorts? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/King George VI Memorial Chapel.

Thank you and well done No Swan So Fine for this timely and efficient creation.

Just to note, I don't love the photo very much though of course it is much much better than nothing and is absolutely of value to the article because we can see how the thing looks! But it is old and small and not great generally (hello Geograph from 2003!) and I imagine that if we keep looking we might with luck find something better, eventually, or an editor with a camera will find themselves there, or whatever. For now I have cropped it a bit to diminish the foreground tarmac area which was a bit much, and I hope that has helped.

Well done again for getting this done!

Cheers DBaK (talk) 18:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is awful, for what will be one of the most viewed articles on the site next week. I'll take proper reference ones next summer. No Swan So Fine (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great, thank you! DBaK (talk) 08:09, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The result was: promotedbyRoySmith (talk) 17:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Queen Elizabeth II wanted the King George VI Memorial Chapel to hold the remains of three British monarchs and their consorts? Source: https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/IF0501475187/TTDA?u=wes_ttda&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=a9eafb8a Douglas Keay, Princess Margaret's ashes to rest by her father, The Times, page 3, 15 February 2002 "The moment of the Princess's interment is likely to be particularly poignant for the Queen, who some 30 years ago instructed architects to design a new chantry to one side of St George's Chapel with places specifically for three monarchs and their consorts".]
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Doctor Who (season 2)

Created by No Swan So Fine (talk). Self-nominated at 12:13, 18 September 2022 (UTC).[reply]

• Article is neutral, meets the required length, and is sufficiently referenced—created on 14 September, within seven days of this nomination. Hook is incredibly interest, succinct, and reliably sourced; relevant to recent events too, which is always good. QPQ looks good (thanks for that!). This is good to go! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @No Swan So Fine and Rhain: unfortunately, bare URLs are a violation of DYK's supplementary guidelines – can those be cleaned up first? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Theleekycauldron: Thanks for the ping! It appears that ref was added after the DYK review; I've cleaned it up. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 05:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Awesome, thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 05:18, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are the coffins just placed in the soil below the slab and then piled over with soil like a standard graveyard,or is there a crypt down there with shelves? Romomusicfan (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who deleted the section on Interment Chamber, but it was all explained there and in the references given. It is a crypt, not a place with soil. Friothaire (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The source was The Sun which was deprecated under WP:THESUN. The section was de-sourced by David Gerard and then deleted as unsourced by No Swan So Fine. I've trimmed out the bits about management and put in a reliable source (CNN) which affirms the basic nature of the chamber as a crypt, not soil.Romomusicfan (talk) 08:40, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't love the current wording or position of this. It seems a bit arsey-versey and weirdly blunt. I've had a go at the wording but I didn't do a very good job, and I wonder if we can find a better home for the subsection??? DBaK (talk) 10:35, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think your version is fine. Crypts are a fairly creepy concept anyway - unless you're refrigerating the bodies with a view to reanimating them some day then what is the point of not sticking them in the ground for recycling? However some people go in for that (see the Ancient Egyptians and pyramids) so it's worth making it clear what the setup is - Soil vs Shelves.Romomusicfan (talk) 11:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Someone dropped in the new photo of the replacement ledger stone, someone else removed it on the grounds that it had no licence, I replaced on the grounds that I thought it looked like it did, and now I'm worried that I was wrong and the remover was right. Crisis of faith, an ting. I think I am going to re-remove it, on the grounds that it is sometimes better to err on the side of caution, and then hope that someone with more clue than I have (this is not a high barrier to overcome) will say or do something that looks or sounds authoritative. Best to all DBaK (talk) 07:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst there are multiple journalistic sources that attest to the ledger stone being replaced by a new one in 2022, and many are usually reliable, all of the sources are very similar in wording.

This implies that all are simply regurgitating a single common piece

I cannot yet find the press release that accompanied the photograph that was released to see what was actually said.

Clearly we can’t allow original research, but viewing the image shows a marked difference in the colour of the lettering, which very much suggests that this is the original stone with additional inscriptions 2A02:C7C:5E6B:D600:3036:98F0:3AF1:5955 (talk) 04:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]