Talk:Pippa Middleton/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Ancestry

Do we really need an ancestry section as far as I can see it is not relevant to her notability, cant see any more than just a link to Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge in see also is needed and we can delete the ancestry section. MilborneOne (talk) 12:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

I have replaced the ancestry section - Middleton is a well known columnist/celebrity who has an interesting ancestry - with links to very well known prime ministers. Readers should NOT have to go to the page of her sister - Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. - for this information. 125.168.85.156 (talk) 00:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Do note that notability applies to article topics, not to the selection of content for an article. Something that is relevant to the topic and encyclopedic may be included even if it is not separately notable, and is not particularly relevant to the reason that the subject is notable. That does not mean such information must be included of course, merely that it may be. DES ^(talk) 01:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the issue is one of undue weight. Very few biographical articles have such sections, of course. StAnselm (talk) 02:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

As I removed it once before with no objections my original position still stands that her ancestry has nothing to with her notability or the reason she has a page, out of tens of thousands of biographical articles only a small few have ancestry sections where it is directly relevant and I cant see Miss Middleton being an exception and the link to her family article is sufficient. MilborneOne (talk) 17:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The ancestry section on this page is just as important as the ancestry section on the Mark Shand page- both Mark Shand (Duchess of Cornwall's brother) and Pippa are the siblings of future Queens of England. That is why Mark Shand has a FULL ancestry section and it is why the Pippa Middleton ancestry edition has always been required on this person's page. Therefore, I have returned the ancestry section on the Pippa Middleton page.Srbernadette (talk) 21:55, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

From what I can see the ancestry section is not relevant to Mark Shand either but that is nothing to do with this page. MilborneOne (talk) 17:44, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

We need to have consistency here - all of the siblings of kings and queens of England and the UK of have their ancestry included on their pages. This is why Pippa Middleton has hers on her page too. Please research all of the siblings of the kings and queens of England and the UK. We hope that has cleared up the confusion for you.Srbernadette (talk) 22:15, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

As far as I know Pippa Middleton is not a sibling of a king or queen, you need to read what others have said that her ancestry is not relevant or encyclopedic and this is not a geneological website. MilborneOne (talk) 18:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Personal life

I have removed the "Personal life" section which is just tabloid stuff and not particularly encyclopedic, it is also sourced from the Daily Mail which is not particularly regarded as a reliable source. MilborneOne (talk) 12:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

My removal was reverted as a better source was found, please note that it is still not encyclopedic or relevant, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 13:00, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Arse

"At the wedding, Middleton's white figure-hugging dress, which, like the bride's, was created by Sarah Burton of Alexander McQueen, was highly praised in the media."

Let's not be quite so coy. It wasn't the dress itself, was it? CulturalSnow (talk) 05:59, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

I would actually say that she is mostly (if not solely) known for her bum. Surely this needs to be mentioned. Iago2¹² 10:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

crystalballing

Saying that Pippa Middleton will one day be the Lady Glenaffric is Crystal Balling. It requires her to first marry the heir and then for the heir to become Laird Glenaffric. Until that occurs, this is not appropriate to include in the article, because it hasn't happened yet. Please remove it. There is no excuse for it. 98.10.165.90 (talk) 17:37, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

There is a reason for it: all of the verifiable citations state that she is the future Lady Glenaffric - which is obviously newsworthy. The article on Prince Charles states that he is the Heir Apparent to the throne. Charles may in fact NOT become the next King; however, the fact remains that he is - at this point - the future King of the UK and is recorded as such.122.105.164.74 (talk) 23:17, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Its crystalballing. It is a not a certainty. Charles is the hier apparent, but it is by no means certain that he will be the future king. The former is stated in his article, the latter righly not.-122.62.62.173 (talk) 03:51, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Charles is the heir apparent - meaning the following - "An heir apparent or heiress apparent is a person who is first in line of succession and cannot be displaced from inheriting by the birth of another person". Middleton's fiancé is the heir apparent to the lairdship of Glen Affric. Thus Pippa is the future Lady Glen Affric - which the refs. all clearly state. The refs. do NOT say that she IS currently Lady Glen Affric, and rightly so. Similarly, according to Wikipedia, in the future, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall "will legally become queen consort, in accordance with English common law,[208] if Prince Charles becomes king". [209][210] 101.182.219.133 (talk) 04:39, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

She just married James Matthews, is there any info on what her last name is now?

Is it still Middleton or is it now Matthews? 2.102.184.254 (talk) 13:11, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

• Don't know, but she now has the courtesy title of 'Mrs Matthews of Glen Affric the younger', this should be added somewhere–Kiwipat (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, no confirmation if she has changed her name yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katie960 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

All citations - including the UK Times and the UK Daily Telegraph - report that she remains the future Lady Glen Affric — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.3.37.169 (talk) 04:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Glen Affric

David Biddulph edited on June 2nd, a concise introduction that must be retained; he refers to Pippa's impending title in an appropriate manner. Reinstating this editor's version should be acceptable to all.2001:8003:4ECD:F300:D92E:8A05:CEB9:FC74 (talk) 10:52, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Not really apart from being bad English it is far to much speculation for the lead and posibly misleading as written. MilborneOne (talk) 11:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Lead is suitably short and correct. No need for any wedding photos. Well researched article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:4E8F:6D00:9C65:FA06:BE08:8F80 (talk) 11:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Lead should refer to Middleton's husband's impending title (and thus her own) - not the husband's secondary occupation. The edit by David Biddulph on June 2nd 2017 remains. 101.189.97.127 (talk) 04:15, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

My edit of 2 June was merely correcting the latter part of the sentence which implied that the inheritance was certain. I expressed no opinion regarding the earlier part of the sentence. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:41, 23 August 2017 (UTC)