Talk:Elizabeth II#RFC Lead Paragraph

{{Article history

|action13 = FAR

|action13date = 2023-01-14

|action13link = Wikipedia:Featured article review/Elizabeth II/archive1

|action13result = kept

|action13oldid = 1133524768

|currentstatus=FA

|topic=History

|maindate=June 2, 2012

|maindate2=September 19, 2022

|dykdate=2 April 2006

|dykentry=... that Queen Elizabeth II (pictured) once worked as a lorry driver?

|itndate=9 September 2015

|itn2date=2 June 2022

|itn3date=8 September 2022

|otd1date=2004-06-02|otd1oldid=3963247

|otd2date=2005-02-06|otd2oldid=16335592

|otd3date=2005-06-02|otd3oldid=16335239

|otd4date=2006-02-06|otd4oldid=38417972

|otd5date=2006-06-02|otd5oldid=56581891

|otd6date=2007-06-02|otd6oldid=135423408

|otd7date=2008-02-06|otd7oldid=189219815

|otd8date=2009-02-06|otd8oldid=268852745

|otd9date=2010-02-06|otd9oldid=341691955

|otd10date=2012-02-06|otd10oldid=475319946

|otd11date=2015-02-06|otd11oldid=645588046

|otd12date=2017-02-06|otd12oldid=764080684

|otd13date=2019-02-06|otd13oldid=882067482

|otd14date=2022-02-06|otd14oldid=1069959988

|otd15date=2023-11-20|otd15oldid=1186101176

}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=FA|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|blp=other|listas=Elizabeth 02 Of The United Kingdom|1=

{{WikiProject Biography|politician-work-group=yes|politician-priority=Top|royalty-work-group=yes|royalty-priority=Top}}

{{WikiProject British Royalty|importance=top|Operation London Bridge=yes}}

{{WikiProject Caribbean|importance=mid|Barbados=yes|Jamaica=yes|Bahamas=yes|Saint Vincent=yes|Saint Vincent-importance=Mid|Saint Lucia=yes|Antigua and Barbuda=yes|Saint Kitts and Nevis=yes|Barbados-importance=Mid|Jamaica-importance=Mid|Bahamas-importance=Mid|Saint Lucia-importance=Mid|Antigua and Barbuda-importance=Mid|Saint Kitts and Nevis-importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Polynesia|importance=mid|Tuvalu=yes|Tuvalu-importance=top|Niue=yes|Niue-importance=top|CI=yes|CI-importance=top}}

{{WikiProject Zimbabwe|importance=low|Rhodesia=yes|Rhodesia-importance=top}}

}}

{{Press

| author = Emily Yahr

| title = Do you fall down a Wikipedia rabbit hole after each episode of 'The Crown'? You’re not alone

| org = The Washington Post

| url = https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/01/04/do-you-fall-down-a-wikipedia-rabbit-hole-after-each-episode-of-the-crown-youre-not-alone/?utm_term=.912d6ea08b11

| date = 4 January 2018

| quote = Queen Elizabeth’s Wikipedia page was the third-most-visited entry with 19.2 million views … Traffic to the queen’s Wikipedia page peaked on Dec. 10, when the second season of "The Crown" started streaming

| author2 = Armon Sandler

| title2 = Queen Elizabeth II’s Wikipedia Page Is Trolled After Her Death With A Chief Keef Album Cover: ‘RIP Bozo’

| org2 = Uproxx

| url2 = https://uproxx.com/music/queen-elizabeth-ii-chief-keef-wikipedia/

| date2 = 8 September 2022

| quote2 = In a tweet shared on Thursday afternoon, a user said “Someone already griefed the Queen Elizabeth II Wikipedia page lmaooo.” The tweet is accompanied by a screenshot of Queen Elizabeth II’s Wikipedia page with the “Article” tab highlighted.

| subject3 = article

| author3 = Jody Serrano

| title3 = How Wikipedia’s ‘Deaditors’ Sprang Into Action on Queen Elizabeth II’s Page After Her Death

| org3 = Gizmodo

| url3 = https://gizmodo.com/queen-elizabeth-ii-died-wikipedia-deaditors-charles-1849516945

| date3 = 9 September 2022

| quote3 = While some on the internet were glued to Twitter or the BBC, checking for news or watching the planes en route to Balmoral Castle, one group of dedicated Wikipedia editors sprang into action updating the late queen’s page in the minutes after Buckingham Palace announced the news.

| subject4 = article

| author4 = Annie Rauwerda

| title4 = Who the hell updated Queen Elizabeth II’s Wikipedia page so quickly?

| org4 = Input

| url4 = https://www.inputmag.com/culture/queen-elizabeth-ii-death-wikipedia-updates

| date4 = 9 September 2022

| quote4 = Upon Queen Elizabeth II’s death, the world was quick to note the free encyclopedia’s up-to-the-minute coverage. “WIKIPEDIA DIDN’T WASTE ANY TIME,” someone tweeted. “Someone was in there watching her last breaths with a computer on wikipedia ready to just press enter,” another joked.

| subject5 = article

| author5 = Jeff Parsons

| title5 = How Wikipedia responded when news of the Queen’s death broke

| org5 = Metro (British newspaper)

| url5 = https://metro.co.uk/2022/09/09/how-wikipedia-responded-when-news-of-the-queens-death-broke-17335549/

| date5 = 9 September 2022

| quote5 = In the case of the Queen’s death, the legion of volunteers that keep up the ‘Free Encyclopedia’ sprang into action to keep it updated. The first edit made to the Queen’s Wikipedia page came just minutes after the first sources broke the news.

|subject6 = article

|author6 = Kai McNamee

|title6 = Fastest 'was' in the West: Inside Wikipedia's race to cover the queen's death

|org6 = NPR

|date6 = 2022-09-15

|url6 = https://www.npr.org/2022/09/15/1122943829/wikipedia--queen-elizabeth-ii-death-deaditors-editors-article

| subject7 = article

| author7 = Liam Mannix

| title7 = Evidence suggests Wikipedia is accurate and reliable. When are we going to start taking it seriously?

| org7 = The Sydney Morning Herald

| url7 = https://www.smh.com.au/national/evidence-suggests-wikipedia-is-accurate-and-reliable-when-are-we-going-to-start-taking-it-seriously-20220913-p5bhl3.html

| date7 = 13 September 2022

| quote7 = About 3.30am (AEST) on Friday, the British royal family announced the Queen had died. About two minutes later her Wikipedia entry had been updated to note her death.

}}

{{Banner holder |collapsed=yes|

{{Annual report|2011, 2012, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023}}

{{Top 25 Report|Jul 21 2013|May 3 2015|Sep 6 2015|Apr 17 2016|Oct 30 2016|until|Jan 15 2017|Apr 30 2017|Nov 26 2017|until|Jan 28 2018|Apr 15 2018|Apr 22 2018|May 13 2018|until|May 27 2018|Nov 17 2019|until|Dec 8 2019|Dec 22 2019|Jan 5 2020|Jan 12 2020|Apr 5 2020|Nov 15 2020|until|Jan 10 2021|Feb 14 2021|Feb 28 2021|until|Apr 25 2021|Jun 6 2021|Jan 9 2022|Feb 6 2022|Feb 20 2022|May 29 2022|Jun 5 2022|Sep 4 2022|until|Oct 2 2022|Nov 13 2022|Apr 30 2023|May 7 2023|Dec 17 2023}}

{{Old moves

|title1=Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom

|title2=Elizabeth II

|collapsed=yes

|list=

RM, Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom → Elizabeth II, No consensus, 8 January 2010, discussion
RM, Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom → Elizabeth II, No consensus, 25 February 2010, discussion
RFC, Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom → Elizabeth II, Moved, 18 March 2010, discussion
RM, Elizabeth II → Queen Elizabeth II , No consensus, 18 April 2010, discussion
RM, Elizabeth II → Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, No consensus, 20 July 2014, discussion
RM, Elizabeth II → Queen Elizabeth II, Not moved, 2 June 2018, discussion
RM, Elizabeth II → Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Not moved, 30 July 2023, discussion
RM, Elizabeth II → Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Procedural close, 14 August 2023, discussion

}}

{{Refideas

|{{Cite book |last=Brandreth |first=Gyles |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-yCIEAAAQBAJ |title=Elizabeth: An Intimate Portrait |publisher=Random House |year=2022 |isbn=978-0-241-58260-2 |mode=cs2 |url-access=limited}}

}}

{{Copied

|from = Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

|from_oldid = 1246810758

|to = Elizabeth II

|to_diff = 1250763146

|to_oldid = 1249581228

|date = 11:12, 12 October 2024

}}

{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config |archiveheader={{aan}} |maxarchivesize=200K |counter=49 |minthreadsleft=4 |algo=old(15d) |archive=Talk:Elizabeth II/Archive %(counter)d}}

Main Photo

I would be in favour of changing the image of Elizabeth II to a photo from sometime in the middle of her reign, as that’s what most people will remember her as.

This photo is on the Commons:

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Her_Majesty_Queen_Elizabeth_II_of_the_Commonwealth_Realms.jpg Waverland (talk) 08:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

:I must admit, I have never liked the current photo from 1959 so I'd be mor than happy for it to be changed. Although, I must admit that the 2015 Photo looks better and should be reinstated https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Queen_Elizabeth_II_in_March_2015.jpg Pepper Gaming (talk) 23:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

::can we not open a new RFC to discuss this? Pepper Gaming (talk) 11:52, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

:::It's unlikely everyone's changed their minds after the very deliberate discussion that was only a year ago. Remsense诉 11:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

::::18 months ago now, but I agree. Choice of photo for an infobox can be subjective, so I’m not keen on re-opening the issue once a consensus was reached. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

:::::Completely understand that, and if a consensus was reached then that must be accepted. I just think that the photo of the 33 year old Queen is not a good representation for how the majority of the public will remember her, but as you say it is definitely subjective. Waverland (talk) 14:22, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

::::::I completely agree with @Waverland, But I think it's time to open an RFC. I've never liked the portrait for many reasons (The fact that it is a Painting, rather than an actual photograph is one of those reasons). I'm still not budging from my original opinion (an opinion I formed 18 months ago when the image was first changed). And I feel like it should be changed to at least a Photograph of the Queen rather than a Painting Pepper Gaming (talk) 19:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

:::::::It isn't a painting. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 19:57, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

::::::::If it isn't a painting, then what is it? Pepper Gaming (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::I don't know. I'm stumped. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:13, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::Turns out it's an early colour photograph. But it also looks like a painting at the same time. It's so confusing Pepper Gaming (talk) 10:16, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::I do like the 2015 photo better than this one. Cremastra (talk) 23:33, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

:::::::While i agree with you, it’s not a painting, the portrait of the Queen Mother is but this one is an actual photo. Waverland (talk) 19:58, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

::::::::So it's an actual Photograph and not a Painting? I've always thought of it to be the latter Pepper Gaming (talk) 20:18, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::I’ve just checked and it was take by Donald McKague in December 1958, published in 1959. Waverland (talk) 20:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

::this SHOULD be reinstated as not many people remember her as a new, young, monarch Realpala (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

:Pepper Gaming said:

::"But I think it's time to open an RFC. I've never liked the portrait for many reasons (The fact that it is a Painting, rather than an actual photograph is one of those reasons). I'm still not budging from my original opinion (an opinion I formed 18 months ago when the image was first changed)."

:Thank you for letting us know that you reject WP:CONSENSUS and will continue to raise this issue until you get your own way. Duly noted. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

::The last RFC voted for this one by a vote, as I recall, of 16 to 12. A year is long enough for minds to change or new views to come from new editors. I see nothing wrong with a new RFC.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

:::+1, consensus can change over time. A new RfC would not be against policy.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

:We've already been through this, multiple times. The 1959 image is what got consensus. PS - I highly doubt you'd get a consensus to replace the image, with a portrait. GoodDay (talk) 10:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

::completely understandable, but I think you misunderstood what was being said. there was no discussion to replace the current photo with a portrait, rather confusion over whether the current image was a photograph or a painting. Waverland (talk) 15:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

:::All that is needed is the same level of consensus that got this on the page, that is a majority vote in a preference poll. Wehwalt (talk) 16:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

::@GoodDay Can I ask what you mean by "I highly doubt you'd get a consensus to replace the image, with a portrait"

::Do you mean with replacing the current (1959) image with a Painting/Drawing?

::(And to clarify, part of the reason why I was opposed to the 1959 image in the first place was because I originally thought it was a Painting/Drawn portrait Pepper Gaming (talk) 11:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

:::A photo is better than a painting. GoodDay (talk) 17:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

::::I agree, I was opposed to the 1959 image for a long time because I thought it was a Painting or a Drawn portrait. Pepper Gaming (talk) 10:32, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

::::A photo is also better than something that's easily mistaken as a painting. Ric36 (talk) 17:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

:::::So I guess we're still getting nowhere with this. Ric36 (talk) 16:52, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

::::::I support a change to something in the 2020s Pharaoh496 (talk) 18:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

:::::I still don't understand how it can be mistaken for a painting. What aspects look painted? The light play on the jewels, the hair detail, and everything else show it to be a photograph. Cremastra (talk) 23:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

::::::It’s bad photo. Change it to the coronation one. 2A00:23EE:19A0:1D71:C5E4:49EA:D3A3:E3B3 (talk) 07:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

:::::::Nah. Remsense ‥ 论 07:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

:::::::Is the coronation pic any better? Ric36 (talk) 18:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

:I support changing the photo. The current photo is not representative of how Elizabeth II is commonly depicted in present-day media. It also just... looks bad. There are better-quality photos available and we should use them. Birdsinthewindow (talk) 16:16, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Is it possible to have a slideshow of portraits from throughout her reign? That would be great. --Surturz (talk) 02:24, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

:We did something like that when we ran the article as TFA on the date of her funeral. Wehwalt (talk) 15:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

::I believe that even though this conversation is dead, I would like to continue it by putting a series of images of when I believe she was most famous. I also don't really like the current one, as it depicts her when she started to become Queen, rather when most people remember her as. Feel free to nominate many more by putting them on this list, as this is not that many

File:Queen Elizabeth II official portrait for 1959 tour (retouched) (cropped) (3-to-4 aspect ratio).jpg|1 (current image) (1959)

File:Queen Elizabeth II of New Zealand (cropped).jpg|2 (2011)

File:The Queen of New Zealand, 1986.jpg|3 (1986)

File:Queen Elizabeth II March 2015.jpg|4 (2015)

File:Elizabeth II greets NASA GSFC employees, May 8, 2007 edit.jpg|5 (2007)

File:Elizabeth II waves from the palace balcony after the Coronation, 1953.jpg|6 (1953)

File:Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain(cropped).jpg|7 (1976)

File:Queen Elizabeth II - 1953-Dress.JPG|8 (1953)

File:The Queen of Australia.jpg|9 (2011)

::Wcamp9 (talk) 04:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

:::Will you have the portrait from 1992? 189.162.192.106 (talk) 02:13, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

:::Next time a conversation of this kind is dead, please refrain from reviving it. Remsense ‥ 论 02:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

::::Remsense, I have avoided continuing on this conversation as I felt that it was not getting anywhere and it was best left alone. However, your rudeness and stubbornness towards anyone who expresses an opinion in trying to improve Wikipedia for readers is hard to ignore. The existing consensus that you claim should be kept was only reached with 28 people, it’s not as if half a million people decided this was a good photo!

::::If multiple people are raising a question as to how useful/recognisable this photo of QEII is, then I believe the way to address this is by hearing and understanding concerns, and then possibly discuss reaching another consensus. Shutting them down immediately and basically trying to silence other contributors is not the way in which this should be handled. It has been more than 2 years now since the previous consensus was agreed and the previous one was reached in the immediate aftermath of her death, perceptions and feelings most certainly have changed since then. Waverland (talk) 08:01, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

:::Personally I'd go for No. 3 in part because it's the middle of her reign but also it's a similar in period photo to the one used for Philip. Looks weird to me how his article uses a photo from 1992 and hers from 1959 when they were a married couple. Rambling Rambler (talk) 23:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

:::In favour of either 3 or 4, with 3 being the a more neutral choice. 4 is a 21st century iconic photo that has been used on Wikipedia for a while and has thus been circulated across the wider internet. TansoShoshen (talk) 19:51, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

I very much like the 1959 photo. Surtsicna (talk) 09:22, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

:the 1986 one should be used as its in the middle of her reign Realpala (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

::I also like the 1986 photo; she's recognizable but still looks similar to the coronation photo. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 22:25, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

How come her full name isn't given as Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor?

It's currently Elizabeth Alexandra Mary, but if I'm not mistaken, Windsor is her last name. Banedon (talk) 06:52, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

:Yes, it is. But because the last discussion ended without consensus, we are stuck with the status quo of only given names. DrKay (talk) 07:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2025

Note her highly successful state visit to Germany in 1965; reference the account of the visit in Britain's 'Mr X'

Sir Frank Roberts and the making of British foreign policy, 1930-68, by Jonathan Colman. J1282 (talk) 15:35, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

:File:X mark.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Tlx|Edit semi-protected}} template. Remsense ‥ 论 15:37, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Philip de László - Princess Elizabeth of York - 1933.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for April 21, 2026. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2026-04-21. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. 100 year birthday anniversary If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 23:42, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

DukeandDuchessofYorkwithBabyElizabethII (cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:06, 15 May 2025 (UTC)