Jump to content

Talk:Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece

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

Requested move

[edit]

Marie-Chantal, Princess of Greece and Denmark has her father listed as Robert W. Miller (which I believe is correct, except for the fact that the Robert W. Miller she and her sisters are connected to died about 30 years before they were born. This could be a problem, no? I don't know if this is the right place to write this but I couldn't find anywhere else to write it. I also don't know how to correct this. Redlady1 (talk) 01:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marie-Chantal, Princess of Greece and Denmark → Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece … Rationale: A user unilaterally moved this page. Marie-Chantal is the wife of a man title crown prince, and reference to Marie-Chantal is almost always in the form of "crown princess" Therefore the page ought to be moved back. Charles 16:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think calling her Crown Princess is a little dodgy. Her husband is a self-style Crown Prince - I say that because although his father was briefly King of Greece, the monarchy was over-thrown many decades ago and has no chance whatsoever of getting the throne back. It's an empty, hollow title, which has no meaning - and I would dispute if she has any real right to use it. Marcus Tully 13:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You think that, but after all that is only what you think. If it is empty and hollow and has no meaning, why are you bothering to dispute it? There is decades, maybe even centuries, of international custom behind according titles to members of formerly reigning families. Her title is one of the kingdom of Greece, not of the republic of Greece, and that is why she can use it. Charles 14:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not what I think - it's a simple fact. The Kingdom of Greece does not exist, and has not for a while. It did not exist for centuries, as it was a 19th century creation. So let me re-state clearly that I believe using a title with no legal meaning is utterly ridiculous. By your logic I could called myself President of West Florida, and Wiki would have to accept it. Marcus Tully —Preceding comment was added at 16:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not care what you believe. See WP:NPOV. You could call yourself the Emperor of China for all it matters, but you would not be on Wikipedia because you are not notable. Charles 20:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I am on Wikipedia - just not with dodgy titles. Your argument has no logic - either she has the right to call herself Crown Princess or she does not. Just because some social magazines call her that, does not mean that it is correct. I did see WP:NPOV, and the neutral point of view would be to use no title for her, since it offends millions of Greeks doing so, and would seem to suggest we support a royal family 'of' their country they don't want. Marcus Tully 11:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does not matter. International convention allows members of exiled royal families to use titles of the family. The mature thing to do would be to leave it alone. It all these millions of Greeks are so offended by it they should just ignore it. Charles 16:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
The page was already moved there. That's where it is right now. Jtdirl moved it unilaterally because it was unfairly moved in the first place. It has been suggested that it should be moved elsewhere, so a new vote might start soon, but this vote is effectively closed. Kafziel 14:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page move was invalid so page returned to agreed location

[edit]

As the page was unilaterally moved without proper procedure I have re-instated it to the agreed location. We do not need to vote to revert a unilateral change that was not properly done. If the mover wants to move the page then they should follow procedure, make a request and have users vote on it. That is the standard procedure. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 18:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There never has been any convention nor "agreement" upon precise naming of these kind of pretenders. Nor can such agreement be so blatantly POV as is titling her as Crown Princess. The unilateral move made by User:Jtdirl is, in my opinion, POV. It strengthens the royalist pretension. Marie-Chantal's article had been created as Marie-Chantal Miller. It was then renamed Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece but very soon moved to a less POV location, Marie-Chantal, Princess of Greece and Denmark where is had stayed almost a year, after which Charles above opened a RM, and Jtdirl promptly declared its location for almost a year as "unilateral and against agreement". ObRoy 20:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Upon marriage, MC took her husband's name. Since her husband is titled crown prince by courtesy, MC is titled crown princess. How is Princess of Greece and Denmark less POV? That would be fine if she was married to one of Pavlo's brothers. Think about what you're saying. Charles 20:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The rules on page moves, on naming and on content are clearly laid out all over Wikipedia. The page location follows the Naming Convention rules on Wikipedia. ObRoy doesn't seem to understand the rules on naming on Wikipedia. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 20:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was also ObRoy's only post. Charles 20:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very clearly, User:Jtdirl is not able to cite any precise rule of naming conventions. I say that there is no agreement upon precise naming of these kind of pretenders. Nor can such agreement be so blatantly POV as is titling her as Crown Princess. ObRoy 21:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Marie Chantal is not a pretender, nor is her husband. Her husband was born with the title of Crown Prince and will retain it through life unless Greece brings back the monarchy. Also, the wife of a Crown Prince is a Crown Princess. Sorry, but you cannot change fact. Charles 21:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Using the titles "crown prince" and "crown princess", Pavlos and Marie-Chantal make themselves as pretenders. You Charles know very well that there is no longer a constitutional office of crown prince of Greece, therefore anyone using its title is a pretender - it comes from definition. No purpose to deny that they are pretenders. ObRoy 21:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC
Paul does not become a pretender until his father dies. There are no official positions of any Greek title, but they exist by courtesy and are transmitted to wives and the children of princes. I don't know why people pick on the title of Crown Prince/Crown Princess of Greece and say that an equally defunct title such as Prince/Princess of Greece is more NPOV. Charles 21:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
He has the pretension for a constitutional office, crown prince, already. I think the difference is between whether the title is that of a constitutional (or corresponding) position or just a title that does generally not contain any specific power of state. Crown Prince as title clearly gives the impression of constitutional position. Anyway, there are plenty of people in the world who explicitky disagree with them being crown prince and crown princess. ObRoy 21:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Crown Prince is simply a title for the heir to the throne, most of whom have no extra powers. If Constantine's heir was a cousin titled Prince, should that individual not have the title? Pavlos was born with the title and will die with the title. His eldest son will never be crown prince. That is the "rule" for fallen monarchies. Titles, other than general princely ones, tend to freeze. However, that being said, women who marry into these families, if approved, carry the titles of their husbands. That itself is a fundamental standard of royalty, deposed or otherwise. People can disagree with Pavlos and MC being a crown princely couple as much as they disagree with the sky being blue or water being wet. Those who disagree cannot change standard treatment of exiled royals. The most they can do is ignore them. Charles 21:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you just admitted it yuorself. Crown Prince is the title which carries the constitutional position of being the direct heir to the throne. That itself is a "power", and such understood by general readers. I agree that Pavlos was born with the title and he will die with the title - it means that the title will die with him. I agree that titles, other than general princely ones, tend to freeze. I just said that the difference apparently is between a constitutional position and a general title (the latter can be carried by high nobility too). I disagree with effect of marriage if done after the loss of the throne. There are some wives of deposed monarchs and they did not became queens (or equivalent). Their recognized titling was usually "princess", and it really tended to be explicitky lower than the husband's. That seems to be a fundamental standard of royalty and scholarly usage. ObRoy 21:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A crown prince in exile is merely the heir to the heritage of a king. Subsequent heirs are princes. There are some exceptions to the marriage rule, namely morganatic unions and extraordinary examples such as Hermine Reuss (consort of German Emperor William II). On the other side, Queen Anne of Romania married her husband after the monarchy was abolished and she is given the title of queen by other courts and in general. The rule tends to be that women take their husband's titles automatically unless an exception is made. No exception was made in MC's case. The rule is not that women do not use their husband's titles names or use lower titles unless otherwise granted, except in very few cases (such as the Netherlands). Charles 21:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Monarchy was imposed in Greece by the London Conference of 1832 as a sovereign constitution that served United Kingdom in the absence of Greek People. There is no "Crown Prince" title in Greece. If somebody believes otherwise then he or she must translate this title in Greek and stop disregard Greece and its people with this outrageous " Crown prince" thinking of us as some short of natives. And something else..next time that Great Britain will decide to meddle in Greece with nobility "titles" keep in mind that Greeks do not derive historically from Charlemagne and we have the right to protect our rights. Christine Pangopoulos (talk) 06:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
See above. Charles 16:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, there have been extensive discussions of this in the past. What it came down to was to refer to the person what they are most often referred to. MC is referred to as a crown princess, by various courts and in the media. Charles 16:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Where are those discussions? Why does she get "Crown Princess" in her title while the actual Queen of Denmark does not? (The issue seems to have been resolved by the above admin anyway, but I'd still like to get better acquainted with the policies and exceptions for future reference.) Kafziel 18:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
She gets it because she is married to a crown prince. It is a standard reference for the wife of a crown prince. A queen obviously can't be a crown princess. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 18:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, come on. You know what I meant. The queen doesn't have the word "Queen" in her title. Just her name and where she's from. So kings and queens don't get that, but princes and princesses do? Kafziel 19:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. The highest title held is not used. We don't write President Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, King Albert II as article names etc. But lower titles are used because often there may be multiple people at different ranks with the same name but with different titles. It is standard in biography to say "Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom", "Albert II of the Belgians", etc. But it is normal in biography to write "Prince Henri of France", "Princess Mary of the United Kingdom". Biographers know "Mary of the United Kingdom" would be a queen mary of the UK. Lower ranks use Prince, Princess etc, with a crown prince or crown princess using that designation. The only exception is where the prince or princess has a title, in which case the prince/ess is dropped. That is WP rules and normal biographical usage. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 19:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Being an American, I've never gotten involved in the royalty naming issue (which is why I didn't even vote here). Still trying to understand the conventions. I'm still a little confused, but that's okay. Thanks! Kafziel 19:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of ways to solve this problem would be to title Pavlos (and consequently his consort) using Duke of Sparta which is a substantive title. I have nothing against such, presumably recognized titles. ObRoy 01:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may be surprised, but that ducal title is actually less recognized than the Crown Princely title. Greece under the Oldenburgs never had provisions for noble titles aside from the princely titles used by members of the royal family. The title "Duke of Sparta" has only been used sparingly and, during the time that Greece was a monarchy, presumably only outside of Greece. Marie-Chantal may or may not be a Duchess of Sparta, but if she can hold that title which is used for the heir to the throne, she can hold the title of Crown Princess with a stronger basis. Charles 01:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
These persons are so little known anyway... Presumably, their admirers are writing titularies that are not necessarily correct. No proper authority apparently any longer recognizes these titkes. Please kindly show me where in the pre-republican constitution or laws of Greece the title Crown Prince actually is put into use - it may very well be a convenient invention somewhere. Btw, I again read the NC, and the substantive title is actually directed to be used. There also seem to be several examples around WP. On what documented basis do you say that the kingdom did not confer Duke of Sparta to him? Ducal consort title can be acquired by marriage, whereas crown prince and king are frozen in deposement stage (we have the example of Marie-Isabelle de Bourbon-Montpensier becoming Countess of Paris but not Crown Princess of the French). ObRoy 02:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A Greek King stated that the title of Duke of Sparta was to be used by the heir to the throne, however, I believe there were explicit laws stating that titles could not simply be created. The reading of Greek laws would require translation into English, presumably where the title of Crown Prince would come from. Aside from leaving the title in Greek, I don't believe there is any other form that would have been used in English. The Greek Royal Family's website refers to Pavlos as Crown Prince with no mention of the title Duke of Sparta. It also refers to Marie-Chantal as Crown Princess. WP uses the names that people use for themselves that are also the names they are most known by. The crown princely title is extended to Marie-Chantal by the Greek Royal Family and by various other royal courts where the family is most relevant. You are forgetting that Pavlos is the last crown prince... The example of other royals is not relevant until Pavlos dies and his eldest son inherits the headship of the Greek royal house. Regarding Marie-Isabelle though, her husband was born in the lifetime of his grandfather, the deposed French King. Therefore, his father would would have been the last "crown prince", if that title was used in Louis-Philippe's reign. Charles 03:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The crown prince of that France was Prince Royal. And you forget that Philip's father predeceased his own father, already during the reign. Thus, there are sources that mention the young Philip being the Prince Royal of France. Certainly the young Philip also was the acknowledged heir apparent precisely when his grandfather was deposed - it is very easy to find sources to confirm that his accession was even contemplated in the parliament, but by a specific decision, he was "deposed" too. Marie-Isabelle became countess of Paris, the marriage having taken place only after the loss of throne. ObRoy 03:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This all depends on two things: Did France extend the title of Princess Royal to the wife of the Prince Royal, and if so, Marie-Isabelle could only use it if her husband used it. It seems use of that title may have been discontinued with Philip retaining use of the title "Count of Paris". Charles 03:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Greek constitution of 1911: [1]. Relevant portions were in force most of the relevant period - actually, much of its wording lives yet in current constitution. No provision denies the king's power to grant noble titles. No provision says anything about title of crown prince, there are provisions that deal with the successor (whatever is the successor's=heir's title). ObRoy 03:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Duke of Sparta issue arose in 1869, before that version of the constitution. If it wasn't subsequently created, it didn't exist after the constitution was revised. The constitution says nother of either title, but crown prince is and has been used. Charles 03:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe George I granted the future Konstantin I as duke of Sparta. You know, monarchs have inherent powers. Probably no one denies, if a monarch grants a noble title. Actually, you are wrong in assuming that if a later constitution does not mention something, it is invalid - the case is contrary, usually the law is understood as if something that exists is not forbidden by later legislation, it continues as right - were you familiar with US c, you would know the constitutional protection of unenumerated rights. There was the constitutional position of heir-successor in Greek monarchy, but only some tradition or suchlike has made it "crown prince". Now the position is abolished. I believe it is frozen, whereas title such as Sparta is not. ObRoy 03:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marlene Koenig, an author who personally interviews many royals for her writings, specifically asked Constantine II if Pavlos was Duke of Sparta. Constantine said no. You have to remember, the Greek monarchs were consitutional monarchs. George I simply did not have the "power" to legally grant the title of duke to anyone. The title Duke of Sparta was merely a style, in shaky use, that seems to fallen out of use altogether. The right to grant such titles didn't exist in the first place. Crown Prince is the English style for the eldest son and heir of a Greek king, and as such, the wife of a crown prince is a crown princess. Charles 04:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this sort of discussion about the issue has been gone through in other places already. However, it is easy to presume that the deposed CII wants to show explicit Greece-titles in each members' titulary, whereas Sparta in his ambition would be too obscure. That does not change the fact that duke of Sparta is the substantive title that has been in use almost 150 years. Btw, when comparing their numbers by google, the fixed "Crown Prince of Greece" got only a number of hits which is in same degree of magnitude as is that of fixed "Duke of Sparta". We cannot say that CrPr is any overwhelmingly more usual... ObRoy 06:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Duke of Sparta gets less hits than Crown Prince Pavlos of Greece. The use of that unofficial title has been discontinued. Charles 15:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

old talks

[edit]

erm, she was never a crown princess of Greece. I seriously doubt whether we can endorse this sort of royal pretension here. Her husband apparently retains the title, as he was a recognized crown prince in his childhood, though was deposed. Here, same principle should be applied as is with so-called Queen Anne of Romania. Arrigo 19:31, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you however, I think that given the situation she should be styled as such, I mena so is Crown Princess Katherine of Yugoslavia, and we still style the old German, French and Italian Aristocrats using their claimed titles. So although she is not technically the Crown Princess, she is styled as such Mac Domhnaill 22:54, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is located in the wrong spot. to title it as Marie-Chantal, Princess of Greece and Denmark, you are implying by wikipedia standards that she is The Princess of Greece and Denmark which she is not. I am going to move it to Crown Princess Pavlos of Greece which is where it should be. Mac Domhnaill 19:58, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Note

[edit]

This page contains unsigned edits by user:217.140.193.123 (aka user:Arrigo)

Further, these unsigned edits appear to have had only a single goal: find a sort of justification for the express creation of double redirects on the Yougoslavian Princess, only hyperlinked from this talk page, and this hyperlink exclusively resulting from his unsigned edit, when Arrigo/217 started the creation of these double redirects, all of these edits and creations on the same day (21 September 2005), see user talk:Arrigo#Double redirects (again) --Francis Schonken 10:02, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arrigo please stop moving royal articles in general, your actions on wikipedia since day 1 seem to have only focused on that. you have barely contributed anything productive less alone even created a single article. stop moving before discussing it first. Gryffindor 12:43, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Grece is a Republic

[edit]

Please, if you are not stupid you can read this: Greek_plebiscite,_1974. Greece is a republic, democratic and free. We have not princess and princes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.120.8.145 (talk) 02:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you so "stupid" that you failed to learn to spell? Anyway, thanks for informing us of the existence of the Third Hellenic Republic... who knew? --76.210.234.3 (talk) 22:02, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sarcasm directed at a comment by someone whose first language is presumably not English adds nothing to the discussions on this page. 84.120.8.145 has a perfectly valid yet simple point (as do many others on this page). The Greek nation voted to abolish the monarchy in 1974. Ex-King Constantine and his family are pretenders to the throne, and their royal titles are mere self-description. More importantly, reading through Wikipedia's article (having just seen the inclusion of Marie-Chantal Claire Miller in the Sunday Times Rich List 2014) I am struck by the fact that the abolition of the monarchy in Greece does not appear to have a single mention. Anyone unaware of the fact that Greece has been a republic for the last forty-odd years would infer from this article that Greece still has a monarchy and that Ms Claire's self-description as "Crown Princess of Greece" is legitimate, valid and meaningful. This is surely misleading for anyone not "in the know".

Consequently, I propose that it be made clear in the article that Greece abolished its monarchy and that her assumed title of Crown Princess has no legitimacy or legality in Greece, notwithstanding both the rather vacuous claim of her husband to be second in line for the non-existent Greek throne, and the apparent acceptance of the titles of Constantine's family in certain rarefied royalist circles.

Comments are invited before I make the necessary edits.

StefanosPavlos (talk) 10:26, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've made them. Surtsicna (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Calling someone a prince or a king is totally fascist. Excuse me, fascist and stupid. You have to change the title. Greeks decided they want no fake prince, and as of such, there is no king anymore and consequently no princesses. The first king was named after he had the power to do it, in a fascist way. Since then, folks made a revolution and abolished that man, that you call king. By retaining the title in the article, you support a move of violence to control people.

It is not "supporting" the monarchy, it is simply recognizing them by the titles they were born with and/or claim.. which is how they are addressed by ALL heads of state besides Greece. It's international policy, and that overrules personal political beliefs. --24.167.189.100 (talk) 04:52, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is why they are called "pretenders to the throne". They are not real prince and princesses. MicronesianHelper2016 (talk) 20:17, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They are not "pretenders" (her husband does not claim to be King of the Hellenes, rather he uses his title from birth as The Crown Prince of Greece). They are legally a prince and princess in Denmark. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 03:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 12:27, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 09:57, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising on Wikipedia, and discussion of possible page move

[edit]

This is surely one of the worst pages in Wikipedia.

1) The section entitled Career does not have a single citation, yet contains sentences such as "Founded in 2000, Marie-Chantal is fast becoming the number one destination for luxury babywear and gifting" and "Introducing a contemporary approach to childrenswear – this quintessentially Marie-Chantal design is ever-growing. From sleepsuits to cashmere cardigans, blankets, loungewear, and pyjamas – Marie-Chantal’s Angel Wing Collection remains a best-selling style internationally."

This is blatant advertising. It is completely non-encyclopaedic and does not belong in Wikipedia. This section seems to have been added by someone hiding behind an anonymous IPv6 address in Fetcham, Surrey, UK, and it would be a legitimate enquiry to determine if this person is connected to Marie-Chantal Ltd in some way.

This section needs to be replaced by a much shorter section properly sourced, or even completely deleted. I will wait a while to give others time to comment/object etc. before I take any drastic action.

2) The question of the title of the page and the description of its subject as "Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece" has been flogged to death above. I would add the following comment to the discussions. One's views about the legitimacy of claiming titles relating to the defunct Greek throne; naming conventions in royal circles; protocols for naming members of ex-royal families; titles claimed by her husband; etc. etc. etc. are all irrelevant. The only relevant questions are surely: what do reliable sources call her? and: what do reliable sources say about the legitimacy of this title? Because of the controversial nature of the page's title, I think the claim that she should be referred to as "Crown Princess of Greece" needs to be properly sourced, and that is why I am re-opening this discussion.

Currently the description “Crown Princess of Greece” is not supported by a single reliable source in the article. The references listed at the bottom of the page are currently 1) a NYT article behind a paywall; b) a page at www.wargs.com which does not actually refer to her as "Crown Princess of Greece"; c) a page on the wayback machine from the now-defunct greekroyalfamily.org which refers to her as "HRH CROWN PRINCESS PAVLOS" but not as "Crown Princess of Greece"; the remaining references are too low in the reliability stakes: Vanity Fair magazine, mariechantal.com, Hello magazine and Vogue magazine.

The current website for the family [1], refers to her simply as "Princess Marie-Chantal", not as "Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece". There are some mentions of Marie-Chantal's husband as "HRH Crown Prince Pavlos" and Marie-Chantal herself as "Crown Princess Marie-Chantal" but crucially, the words "of Greece" are missing. Even Constantine himself is referred to as "HM King Constantine" and I found a mention of "HM King Constantine, Former King of the Hellenes", but again the words "of Greece" are missing. It is clear, then, that even the ex-royal family of Greece itself does not claim titles containing the words “… of Greece”, and this alone begs the question, why should Wikipedia use titles containing these words?

To be fair, Marie-Chantal is referred to as "Crown Princess of Greece" on her company's website [2], but so what – as was pointed out above, self-description is surely not a RS. I have googled "Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece" but apart from pages of fandom and celebrity links, there seems to be a dearth of reliable sources that support use of this title.

I think the page should be moved to something less controversial and, coincidentally, more in keeping with the family’s own use of titles, and suggest “Princess Marie-Chantal” as per the family's own website[3].

It is incumbent on those who wish to keep the current title, viz. “Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece”, to provide reliable sources that use this title, and preferably, given the controversial nature of the title, reliable sources that support use of this title by explaining why this title should be used and why it is legitimate.StefanosPavlos (talk) 15:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The first issue was mostly addressed in my edit about half and hour before your edit. You are right that there should be more citations.
I do not know Wikipedia policy or Greek culture well enough, to have an opinion about the second issue. Cheers. Mgnbar (talk) 15:43, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, Mgnbar. Your edit teaches me to post more quickly, and to check the article for changes before posting on the talk page! Let's see if anyone responds to my challenge to cite sources for calling Marie-Chantal the Crown Princess of Greece.StefanosPavlos (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.greekroyalfamily.gr/en.html
  2. ^ https://mariechantal.com/homepage/about-us
  3. ^ https://www.greekroyalfamily.gr/en/royal-family.html

Why is she crown princess of Greece?

[edit]

She's just the daughter of a billionaire that married the son of the ex-king of Greece (Greece is a republic since 1974, so king of Greece no longer exists), how does this makes her crown princess of Greece? 79.167.189.17 (talk) 10:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Her husband was Crown Prince of Greece from birth until the abolition of the monarchy and he continues to use the style in pretense, which is transferred to his wife. 2601:249:9301:D570:B935:6111:70A4:C27A (talk) 03:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marie-Chantal,_Crown_Princess_of_Greece&oldid=1240137951"