Talk:Duke of Kent

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

Streets[edit]

Someone should mention that there are streets named duke of kent Geekyperson (talk) 02:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For every ducal title there's probably a street somewhere. Is there a particularly prominent Duke of Kent Street? —Tamfang (talk) 18:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

Someone need to do something about a bad page the duke of Kent. I dont meen to offend HRH price edward of kent but this bad page offend earlier bearer of the title duke of kent — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.231.254.91 (talk) 16:41, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Succession to the Crown Act 2013[edit]

Note that Nicholas Windsor is permanently barred from the succession to the Crown as a Roman Catholic convert. The Succession to the Crown Act 2013 allows someone in the succession to marry a Roman Catholic and still remain in succession, but the 2013 Act did not repeal the prohibition that bars Roman Catholics from the succession itself. The prohibition takes no note of later conversion to Protestantism. Anyone who at any time was (such as by birth or baptism) or later becomes a Roman Catholic (by conversion) is perpetually barred from the succession. I have edited the section in question. Jm3106jr (talk) 01:57, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Duke of Kent. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 14:26, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In 1934, Prince George (1902–1942), . . . , created the titles of Duke of Kent, Earl of St Andrews and Baron Downpatrick.[edit]

In 1934, Prince George (1902–1942), the fourth son of King George V of the United Kingdom and Queen Mary, created the titles of Duke of Kent, Earl of St Andrews and Baron Downpatrick. How could he do such a thing? Eddaido (talk) 11:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's the result of a well-meant but incorrect IP edit[1]. I've reverted. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed[edit]

@Celia Homeford: You reverted my edit. Can you please place [citation needed] flags next to the points in the various sections where you think they’re needed, rather than merely flagging the entire article? Thanks. Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:59, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. There are eight uncited sections, an uncited sub-section and uncited statements in the sections with a citation. One maintenance template is better than peppering the article with a dozen or more. Celia Homeford (talk) 08:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Celia Homeford: Most sections in this article include links to other articles, that themselves provide citations, or when uncited, don't in my view fall into the 'you do need to cite that the sky is blue' category. Under WP:WHEN citations are to be provided when a statement is likely to be challenged "Material that is actually challenged by another editor requires a source or it may be removed." Surely, 6 years is enough time for an editor to have challenged such contributions? If a contribution was 'likely to be challenged' over the last six years, it would have been by now. Can you please supply just one instance of something in the article you are challenging, such that it should be removed otherwise? Chrisdevelop (talk) 23:25, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The first uncited paragraph says: "After the death of Godwin, Earl of Wessex, his son Leofwine (c. 1035–1066) became Earl of Kent sometime between 1056 and 1058." But the first linked article, which has no inline citations, claims Godwin, not Leofwine, was the 1st earl of Kent. There is a link to https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Kent,_Earls_and_Dukes_of at the bottom of that article, and that citation says, "The first holder of the English earldom of Kent was probably Odo, bishop of Bayeux", not Godwin or Leofwine. At Godwin, Earl of Wessex, there's no mention in any of the accessible citations about him being earl of Kent. So, the articles are self-contradictory and contradict the citations in those articles. That's just the first line of the first uncited section.
BTW, pings only work when they are added with a fresh signature. See Template:Reply to/doc#Usage. Celia Homeford (talk) 07:41, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I’ll look into this. Chrisdevelop (talk) 08:09, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Duke_of_Kent&oldid=1207950138"