Talk:Camilla (given name)

Image of Queen Camilla

I do not agree with this removal. The image is relevant and interesting. I will reinstate it unless someone can come up with a good reason why a queen of many countries, the only queen to bear this name, should not illustrate the article about it. SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:54, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is the image illustrative of the name itself? Peter ^Isotalo 19:41, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing in WP:IMGCONTENT which could reasonably prevent a photo of a very famous person from illustrating an article about the name of that person. Thus, Wikipedia is full of such images on such articles. As per this essay, it is appropriate to include historical information. This photo is exactly that. Furthermore, Queen Camilla is included on the list of persons bearing the name. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:14, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The image entry should not have been reversed again without agreement on this page first. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:16, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:IMAGES should be what's relevant here, not a copyright-focused policy.

There is nothing there either. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:09, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Camilla Parker-Bowles isn't illustrative of the name Camilla more than anyone else. Including her here is a pretty obvious recentism. From what I understand, there are very few individuals that are illustrative of given names overall.

Peter ^Isotalo 14:11, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

She is no longer "Camilla Parker-Bowles" and calling her that infers bias.

If we are not to have famous people illustrating any articles about their names, we'd better start removing them alphabetically: Abraham (given name), Anna (name) and so forth... --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:07, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any strength in illustrating given name articles overall. It's also rather rare. But with "Abraham", there's a very obvious connection to a specific individual. No single individual can be closely and singularly associated with the name "Camilla".

Peter ^Isotalo 19:09, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the problems with recentism here. Including one recent example does not necessarily mean that the article is over-using recent examples. Moreover, Queen Camilla is one of the ten oldest notable "people with the given name..." listed in the article. ParticipantObserver (talk) 10:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"One of ten most X" could be applied to just about anyone listed in the article. The choice of who to include would then be mostly arbitrary and still wouldn't actually make anyone wiser about the given name "Camilla". Given name articles aren't suitable for images of individuals overall. Peter ^Isotalo 17:49, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason not to illustrate the article with a photo of a well-known bearer of the name. The picture should be restored. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 19:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion request

I noticed this dispute at the WP:3O noticeboard and I've taken time to read through the debate here. So far as I understand it, this is, in one sentence, a disagreement about whether an image of Queen Camilla is appropriate. Just to give some initial thoughts, remember that the Queen is a living person, and therefore, WP:BLP applies here - indeed, the policy itself points out "Images of living persons should not be used out of context" (see specifically WP:BLPIMAGE). I have looked at the discussion and I do not see the context for having the picture, particularly since, after reviewing the article, no one else with the same forname has a picture in the article. I would suggest that editors maintain consistency within the article, otherwise this may result in continuous reversions (and a possible breach of the WP:3RR rule) or edit-warring.

Hopefully this gives the editors involved some food for thought and leads to a constructive solution. If editors want further assistance please let me know

The Historian (talk) 16:43, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to give your 3O opinion! Three of us, however, believe it is not out of context to have a photo of the most famous bearer of the name. BLP issues are about content that could damage the reputation of a living person, hardly relevant here. In my 15 years of contributing, I have never before seen a risk of reversals or edit-warring as a reason to impact article content. Part of the history of this name is that it has been born by a British queen. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:37, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]