Talk:Crown jewels/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Requested move

Capitalized "c" and "j" are only correct when the term is part of a proper noun, such as "Danish Crown Jewels". This is about crown jewels in the general sense, and thus should not be capitalized. Compare with "king" vs "King of Denmark", and see any dictionary. - Fredrik | talk 29 June 2005 15:41 (UTC)

  • Support. Fredrik | talk 29 June 2005 15:41 (UTC)
  • Oppose. FearÉIREANN(talk) 29 June 2005 18:15 (UTC) Lowercased, crown jewels would refer to all jewels possessed by the crown, including diadems, jewels, necklaces, badges, decorations, jewels worn by monarchs but which are not part of the state jewels, etc. Uppercased it narrows it down to the formal regalia, which are formally called The Crown Jewels. It is uppercased because this article is not about all jewels of the crown but the specific regalia associated with state ceremonial. Changing the capitalisation would change the whole meaning of the article.
    • Look it up in any dictionary or encyclopedia, for example, The American Heritage Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and Encyclopaedia Britannica. In all of these works, "crown jewels", lowercase, is said to denote the formal regalia of a government, and none even mentions the form "Crown Jewels". Fredrik | talk 29 June 2005 18:43 (UTC)
      • They use American English which has a policy of lowercasing words. Wikipedia, as it is not an American publication, has a policy of using AE, British English and other variants, depending on the original language used by the original author and by topic. As there are no American crown jewels and the article is focusing on countries where if English is spoken at all, it is BE or International English, the BE/IE uppercasing of specific nouns as opposed to generic terms, rather than the AE standard of lowercasing everything, is followed here. The Crown Jewels in this article are the official state regalias, not the general jewels used in a monarchy, so the article's name was correctly written in upper case. FearÉIREANN(talk) 29 June 2005 19:56 (UTC)
        • Britannica uses American English? Now please provide evidence for your claim that "Crown Jewels" is used in British English to distinguish from any other form of crown jewels, as I have provided proof to the contrary. In fact, Britannica even uses "crown jewels" when referring to specific crown jewels! (For example, "French crown jewels", and the article on the Tower of London mentions "the crown jewels".) - Fredrik | talk 29 June 2005 20:18 (UTC)
          • Britannica is an American publishing had has been for many years, since it was sold to a US owner. It has long followed AE in many cases and AE capitalisation in all cases. FearÉIREANN(talk) 29 June 2005 20:40 (UTC)
            • My apologies. I have only found one online British English dictionary, which uses lowercase. The Guardian also uses lowercase. You have still not proved your assertion. It is also unclear what you mean by "specific noun". I agree that proper nouns, such as "French Crown Jewels", should be capitalized, but the topic of this article is crown jewels in general, of which there happen to be specific examples. Compare to emperor listing the specific example of the Emperor of Japan -- by your logic, that article should use the term "Emperor" in the general case. As a side note, the original language used by the original author was American English, and the article still uses American English in many places (including the lead section). Fredrik | talk 29 June 2005 21:13 (UTC)
Newspapers in Britain generally (but not universally) use AE - it is a complicated story relating to the use of hot metal technology, etc - but sourcebooks outside the US generally don't, though there are exceptions. Wikipedia had an initial policy that said 'use the language of the original author' but that was dropped when articles on entirely American topics were turning up in BE, and articles on British topics were being written in AE. So the rule is - if about a topic that is exclusively about America, use AE, if about the UK, use BE. Generally articles about countries or topics in countries that don't use one type of English should not have it used. Most of the counties in here either don't use english or if they do use International English, which is a version of BE. Only if an article covers topics linked to places some of which use AE and some of which use BE (eg, the World Bank effects both the US, UK and everyone else) is the language on Wikipedia now decided on by means of who started the page. As to emperor versus Emperor, that would be valid except that this article is not about crown jewels in general (eg, the private tiara of the Queen of Spain, Diana's spencer tiara when she was married to Charles, Queen Elizabeth's private jewellery, etc, all of which are worn publicly and so are identified with the monarchy, but are personal private property). It is about state-owned crowns, state-owned tiaras, state-owned sceptres, state-owned orbs, etc., in other words the official state regalia. Uppercasing defines it as the Crown Jewels. Lowercasing broadens it to any jewels owned or used publicly by the wearer of the crown, both public and private. FearÉIREANN(talk) 29 June 2005 21:36 (UTC)
The Oxford English Dictionary uses lowercase "crown jewels", in reference to "the jewels which form part of the regalia" (my emphasis). And The Guardian uses BE, not AE. - Fredrik | talk 30 June 2005 06:07 (UTC)
Precisely. And this article about sets, not individual royal jewels that are not part of the sets. If it was about say, a diamond necklace personally owned by Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom worn at the State Opening of Parliament, a ring personally owned by Queen Margrethe II of Denmark and worn at state functions, a personally owned tiara worn by Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands worn publicly, a diamond personally owned by Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, then the article would belong at crown jewels. But it isn't. It is about the crowns, orbs an sceptres that are state owned, state symbols worn by the head of state, and which together form a set known as the Crown Jewels or in some cases the Regalia (uppercased). Capitals are used to distinguish the formal name of a formal entity (usually indicated by the use of the definitive article) and something generic; so we have president and the President of the United States, prime minister and the Prime Minister, crown jewels and the Crown Jewels. The capitalisation shows that the article is about the sets, not privately owned jewels worn alongside the Crown Jewels but which aren't part of the set. FearÉIREANN(talk) 4 July 2005 20:22 (UTC)
  • problem i think i see what the problem is. both sides are right. but wikipedia at this moment unfortunately does not allow articles to be listed under small letters. so maybe the correct heading of such an article is "crown jewels", but the system does not allow it to be listed, because it capitalises the first word always... hm.. Antares911 9 July 2005 17:20 (UTC)
  • Support. When used in this sense, it refers to crown jewels in general. – AxSkov (T) 13:22, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed after the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 19:38, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

How to make a disambiguation page?

There is a band, fronted by Steve Conte, also of the New York Dolls, and it's name is the Crown Jewels as you can see here: [1] Can someone please make a disambiguation statement at the top of this article? Or create a page? I'm afraid I've never done it before. --leahtwosaints (talk) 07:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Bohemian/Czech crown jewels

In fact there is no evidence and no witness that Heydrich actually wore the Crown of Saint Wenceslav. Please correct it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.240.190.65 (talk) 17:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Hawaii

There is a section under "North America" that lists the Kingdom of Hawaii's Crown Jewels. Although this is historically accurate, what I am questioning is Hawaii's section being placed under "North America."

Geographically, Hawaii is in fact a part of Oceania and not North America. Although it is politically in union with the North American country of the USA, it is not a part of the continent geographically nor was it at the time of the monarchy of Hawaii, ever in political association with the USA.

I propose that the Hawaii section be moved to the Oceania section. Any thoughts? --74.47.110.52 (talk) 05:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Liechtenstein

Why exactly is Liechtenstein grouped under Germany. It is a sovereign nation. I understand why countries that eventually became part of what is now Germany are grouped under Germany, but Liechtenstein should still be treated as its own country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.130.52.81 (talk) 03:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

moved here

This doesn't make sense: "Despite most crown jewels, for example the ones on the Imperial State Crown, being small, the materials they are carved from are extremely rare, causing most of them to be almost, if not, priceless." --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 06:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Oldest

Anyone know what the oldest crown or oldest piece of regalia is? That should be in the lede. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 06:07, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Kindgom Hanover in Germany

Also Kingdom of Hanover in Germany had his own crown jewels. 178.3.21.150 (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

And who cares?:-) Report it in the article with references :-) Jirka.h23 (talk) 20:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

The crown jewels of Kingdom of Hanover were brought to England by british agent Anthony Blunt.

178.3.21.150 (talk) 14:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Almost Kingdom of Burgundy

I read about this before there was a Wikipedia, but Charles the Bold, the last Duke of Burgundy, aspired to become the king of a new kingdom, and persuaded Emperor Frederick III to crown him. A crown was made, and the ceremony arranged for September 1473 in Trier. With everything in place, the emperor left the city the night before the ceremony, and the new kingdom was never created. The crown has never been heard of since, and was presumably broken up soon after. J S Ayer (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Improper use of citations

I'm working trying to get this page off of Category:Articles needing link rot cleanup from February 2012.

In general the text reads very badly, e.g., "King's Crown:[14]" This case heads a whole list of apparent dead links to images.

It seems to me that references are citations to material that support assertions made in the text, not to provide the text (or in similar instances, an image). I can understand the problem of including images of unknown and possibly copyrighted sources. My thinking is that there could be direct references of the nature of:

Is this a good way to handle this problem? Softtest123 (talk) 06:15, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

External links should not normally be used in the body of an article. - - MrBill3 (talk) 07:01, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Dead Links in Norway section

I have removed the dead links in Norway Crown Jewels. I have also deleted the entries with these citations as not contributing any information to the section.

I also removed the non-sentence "Crown Prince's Crown:" since it contributes no information to the section. The citation might be useful somewhere in the main article.

Softtest123 (talk) 02:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Editing references in Iran (Persia)

Deleting citation to karipearls.com as an unreliable source. This site appears to be a jewelry commercial site. Softtest123 (talk) 20:24, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Citation for Byzantine Empire section

The reference to "Juwelen und Schmuck des Markgräflichen Hauses Baden" has been deleted because it has no support for the cited material. Softtest123 (talk) 04:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Citations for Baden section

The reference to "Byzantine Vestments" has been deleted because it has no support for the cited material and is not about crown jewels. Softtest123 (talk) 05:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Citation for "Ireland" section.

The citation in this section was deleted because it is self published in a blog. Softtest123 (talk) 05:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Deleted citation for "Italy" section

The citation to "The Medici Family" has been deleted because it has no support for the cited material. The cited site refers to banners and flags and not to Crown jewels. Softtest123 (talk) 06:00, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Citations and material in the "Russia" section

The citation link to "Jewels of the Romanovs: Treasures of the Russian Imperial Court" is a home page and contains no information. It has been deleted because it has no support for the cited material.

The list:

  • Barmas of Old Ryazan, medallions from late 12th to early 13th century:,
  • Monomakh's Cap, late 13th to early 14th century:
  • The Crown of Kazan Tzardom of Tsar Ivan IV, mid-16th century:
  • Ivory throne of Tsar Ivan IV, Western Europe, 16th century:
  • Orb of Tsar Boris Godunov, Western Europe, end of the 16th century:
  • Sceptre of Tsar Boris Godunov, Western Europe, end of the 16th century.
  • Golden throne of Tsar Boris Godunov, Persia, before 1604:
  • Golden chain of Tsar Boris Godunov, Western Europe, the 16th century.
  • State helmet of Prince Fyodor Mstislavsky, Turkey, the 16th century:
  • State helmets ("Jericho caps") of Tsar Michael Fyodorovich, 1620-s, master N.Davydov:
  • Crown of Tsar Michael Fyodorovich, 1627:
  • Golden chain of Tsar Michael Fyodorovich, 1st half of the 17th century.
  • Golden throne of Tsar Michael Fyodorovich, Persia, before 1642:
  • Orb of Tsar Alexis Mikhailovich, Turkey, 1662:
  • Sceptre of Tsar Alexis Mikhailovich, Turkey, 1658:
  • Barmas of Tsar Alexis Mikhailovich, Turkey, 2nd half of the 17th century.
  • Diamond throne of Tsar Alexis Mikhailovich, Persia, 1659:
  • Staff of Tsar Alexis Mikhailovich, Turkey, mid-17th century:
  • Pectoral cross with a chain of Tsar Theodore Alekseevich, 1662.
  • "Cap of Monomakh" of the second set of Tsar Peter I Alekseevich, 1682:
  • Sceptre of Tsar Peter I Alekseevich, 1680s.
  • Pectoral cross of Tsar Peter I Alekseevich, 1680s.
  • Diamond crown of Tsar Peter I Alekseevich, 1680s:
  • Diamond crown of Tsar Ivan V Alekseevich, 1680s:
  • Altabas crown of the third set of Tsar Ivan V Alekseevich, 1684:
  • Silver double throne of Tsars Ivan V Alekseevich and Peter I Alekseevich, 1684:
  • State shield, the late 17th century.
  • Crown of Empress Catherine I, 1724, (only wreck survived):
  • Orb of Emperor Peter II, 1727.
  • Crown of Empress Anna Ivanovna, 1730, master G.W. Dunkel:
  • Great Imperial Crown, 1762, master J.Pauzie:
  • Imperial sceptre, 1762, 1774, with Orlov diamond.
  • Imperial orb, 1762, master G.F.Ekart:
  • Maltese Crown of Emperor Pavel I, 1798:
  • Maltese sceptre of Emperor Pavel I, 1798:
  • State sword, the late 18th century
  • Small Imperial Crown, 1856, master L.Zeftigen.

is apparently an attempt to create a Gallery of images, possibly copyrighted. The list, in itself, has no statements of fact; these items might be good titles for images when properly cited.

This list and its associated citations have been deleted.

Softtest123 (talk) 06:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of citation in the "Spain" Section.

The reference to "An image of the crown destroyed in 1734" does not directly support the information as it is presented in the Wikipedia article. This reference has been deleted. Softtest123 (talk) 16:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of citation in the "Brazil" Section.

The reference to "Imperial Museum of Brazil" does not directly support the information as it is presented in the Wikipedia article. This reference has been deleted. Softtest123 (talk) 17:44, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of citation in the "England" section

Though it appears authentic, there is insufficient information on the web page The Crown Jewels to establish authority for, and reliability of, this information. This web page is hosted by linux.gridhost.co.uk. I have sent email via the site email link requesting clarification.

I am deleting the remaining reference in this section as an unreliable source pending clarification.

Softtest123 (talk) 16:59, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Crown jewels. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:34, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Crown_jewels/Archive_1&oldid=1153231899"