Talk:Prince Octavius of Great Britain

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Prince Octavius of Great Britain article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Prince Octavius of Great Britain is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 1, 2022.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 2, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
October 27, 2022	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured article

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance).

British Royalty Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Died Very Young[edit]

What a poor article! What did he die of at such a young age? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.69.81.2 (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown (as far as I can tell; probably fever). He was his mother's 15th child, and both he and his brother Alfred (14th) died young. George III cried: "There will be no Heaven for me if Octavius is not there". PeterSymonds | talk 17:10, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Children often died young back then. As the person above me said, it was possibly fever, but could have been anything. It wasn't at all unusual to lose a few children. 71.66.230.44 (talk) 07:02, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia awaiting RS[edit]

Awaiting WP:RS: Prince Octavius was mentioned in The Madness of King George in the scene when King George wakes his children up when he claims London is flooded, and says that his son has killed him (Octavius was long dead by the time of the film's setting).

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Prince Octavius of Great Britain/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Neonblak (talk · contribs) 13:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC) Before I complete my review of this article, a few positive comments: Lead section and layout are good, as is the neutrality and comprehensiveness of the subject. The child had a short life but significant impact, and is an easy read upon my first read-through. I don't expect to find prose issues, and the things I did notice might end up being more nit-picking than major issues.Neonblak ^talk - 13:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review:

Buckingham House should link to Buckingham Palace.

If it was called Buckingham House then (and the source seems to indicate), you can just link to Palace.Neonblak ^talk - 18:38, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photos needs ALT text per WP:ALT
Inline citations should be after a punctuation such as a comma or period per WP:CITE

If you're referring to "The king was affectionate[5] and indulgent with his young children..." The policy you cited says "citation markers are normally placed after adjacent punctuation such as periods and commas." So while I see what you mean, it's not required. [5] only cites that part of the sentence. Ruby 2010/2013 05:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

True, it is not required, but I wouldn't think that a father being affectionate toward his son to be particularly contentious, even for Royalty; which is what WP:CITE is saying.Neonblak ^talk - 18:38, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prose: Early life

"The prince's name derives from Latin octavus, the eighth, showing that he was the eighth son of his parents." - I would use the indicating instead of showing.
"When Octavius was three Alfred died on 20 August 1782, and Octavius again became the youngest surviving child." - Seems awkward to me. Maybe "Octavius was three years of age when Alfred died on 20 August 1782, and he again became the youngest surviving child."
"In 1820 historian Edward Holt..." - comma after 1820.

Death and aftermath

"Six months later after Alfred's death, Octavius and his sister Sophia were taken to Kew Palace in London to be inoculated from the smallpox virus." - Maybe "Six months after Alfred's death, Octavius and Sophia were taken to Kew Palace..."
"...Octavius became ill and died several days later, on 3 May 1783 at Kew Palace." - needs comma after the date.
"On 10 May, he was buried at Westminster Abbey next to the coffin of his brother Prince Alfred; On the orders of their father King George, on 11 February 1820 the coffins containing the remains of Octavius and Alfred were transferred to St. George's Chapel, Windsor Castle." - two sentences here I think, no capitalization after semi-colon anyway, maybe "On 10 May, he was buried along side his brother Alfred at Westminster Abbey. King George ordered their remains transferred to St. George's Chapel, Windor Castle on 11 February 1820."
"According to Queen Charlotte Octavius' death was unexpected, writing to a friend who..." - Long sentence could be broken up, maybe "According to Queen Charlotte, Octavius' death was unexpected. Once, when writing to a friend who faced a similar tragedy, she said "twice have I..."

I have run out of time for now, will finish at a later time.Neonblak ^talk - 15:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The prince's death had a marked effect, both mentally and physically, on Queen Charlotte, who..." - no need for a comma after physically.
"In later years, King George would have imagined..." - avoid the words "would have" when talking about a specific event. Maybe "In later years, King George imagined..."

Overall, an interesting article, and I look forward to promoting it once these few issues are resolved.Neonblak ^talk - 10:37, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I should be able to address your comments in a few days (busy in real life right now). Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 17:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed most of your comments (I replied to one or two above). Thanks very much for the review! Ruby 2010/2013 05:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to a couple of things above, but neither issue is enough to stop this from promoting. Great job !Neonblak ^talk - 18:38, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prince Octavius of Great Britain. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927024852/http://www.stgeorges-windsor.org/about-st-georges/royal-connection/burial/burials-in-the-chapel-since-1805.html to http://www.stgeorges-windsor.org/about-st-georges/royal-connection/burial/burials-in-the-chapel-since-1805.html

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) 10:17, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery princess?[edit]

The text refers to Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel, who became Princess of Wales in 1795. Who was Princess of Wales from 1779 to 1783, the lifetime of Prince Octavius? Belle Fast (talk) 09:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody, as the PoW was unmarried. No mystery. Johnbod (talk) 14:08, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to the text, there was a Princess of Wales in Octavius' lifetime and it was Caroline. Still mystified. Belle Fast (talk) 11:50, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we could remove that single clause, keeping "sexual misconduct and financial irresponsibility". That makes the point still made but without mentioning an event more than ten years after Octavius's death. Celia Homeford (talk) 17:28, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes (longer cmt ec'd). Johnbod (talk) 17:31, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for bringing this to my attention. I have gone ahead and removed that bit of information. Unlimitedlead (talk) 00:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Why do we need the ref in the first sentence? The information seems covered below. Also, why is there no reference for the "Titles and styles" section? Aza24 (talk) 19:46, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Aza24. The reference in the first sentence points to a source that flat out states that Octavius lived from 23 February 1779 – 3 May 1783. None of the FA reviewers had a problem with it, so it's just been there for a while; I think it's useful to have. As for the "titles and styles" section, British princes have bore the style "Royal Highness" and have been called "The Prince X" for centuries, so no one who looked at this article seemed to question it. Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:57, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see any reason for the ref, in regards to MOS:LEADCITE, but can't really object further I suppose. I would still strongly suggest sourcing the "Titles and styles" section—readers can't be expected to know about title precedents for British princes ahead of time. Aza24 (talk) 21:12, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 21:35, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistency[edit]

The article currently reads (Death and aftermath section):

The day after his son's death, the King passed through a room where artist Thomas Gainsborough was completing the finishing touches on a portrait of the family. The King asked him to stop, but when he found out that the painting was of Octavius, allowed the painter to continue.

This presents an inconsistency: was the painting "of the family" (as the first sentence states) or "of Octavius" (as the second states, implying that it was of him alone)? If the former, the second sentence should likely read "included Octavius" or somethign non-limiting like that. Minturn (talk) 17:53, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Minturn It was a collection of paintings of the royal family. Imagine if you took 5 separate photos of each member of a family, and then displayed them next to each other. Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:00, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So, should the text read "finishing touches on a set of portraits of the family" and "that a painting was of Octavius"? The language now is entirely singular, not what one would expect for a group of paintings. Minturn (talk) 18:35, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Minturn Yes, feel free to do that. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:55, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I will take care of it. Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Minturn (talk) 21:12, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]