Talk:Most Gracious Majesty
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Merge
I personally don't know whether this article can stand up on its own given the existence of Forms of address in the United Kingdom SGGH speak! 17:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Agree. Tanthalas39 (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Info will be added over time, dont be to hasty. Besides it more than merits its own article! --Camaeron (talk) 18:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see the similarities in the comparison between this article and Forms of address in the United Kingdom. This one is more anagolous to Majesty, Royal Highness, Serene Highness and the like, and if they exist, there's no reason for this one not to. --G2bambino (talk) 18:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with both G2 and GoodDay...--Camaeron (talk) 18:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- The first poster is inviting you to justify your article. He's right to. Please tell us why it can't or shouldn't be dealt with in Your Majesty. It's fine to add more info later but you still need to justify it. It is a variant of Your Majesty, after all.--Gazzster (talk) 18:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Your Gracious Majesty is a destinctly British and Commonwealth version of Your Majesty. Your Majesty has much wider usage (it is used throughout Europe and the world). Before this article was created Your Gracious Majesty didn't even have a mention in Your Majesty. Also, Britannic Majesty has its own article also although one could argue that it too is "only" a variant of YOur Majesty. --Camaeron (talk) 19:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
If we do have to merge this page I would prefer it being merged with Your Majesty, as opposed to Forms of address in the United Kingdom. It makes more sense..--Camaeron (talk) 19:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
As of now the article has been improved. When am I allowed to delete the merger template? --Camaeron (talk) 21:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
IMHO? --Camaeron (talk) 19:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Looks like the page is safe for now! yay! --Camaeron (talk) 15:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
