Talk:Samuel Chatto

Notability

IMO, the person is currently 24th in line of succession to the British Throne, and many reliable sources are available Now. please see Charles Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley or Lady Margarita Armstrong-Jones. So, I think there is no notability problem. Please kindly nominate for deletion if you disagree. Thank you. MyanmarBBQ (talk) 18:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

DrKay and MyanmarBBQ, before an edit war ensues, I suggest a deletion nomination. This article was last nominated eight years ago, so there might be more sources out there on Chatto. It's worth looking. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Agree last afd nominated is long time ago! To be clear, it is better to discuss in AFD discussion. There is no reason to redirect this blp article to his mother. MyanmarBBQ (talk) 18:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

If you'd like to vote, please do so at the nomination discussion. The conversation has moved there. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:49, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Btw, DrKay is possible anti-royalty, I alway see him on Afd for royal family. He alway opposed royal related articles. MyanmarBBQ (talk) 18:53, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

That accusation is unnecessary. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, That is my opinion. MyanmarBBQ (talk) 18:56, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

You have already been warned before for attacking other editors, according to your talk page. Edit civilly. Accusations aren't going to help in your effort to keep this article. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:57, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

2025 Recreation

I have recreated this article, given that it has been 6 years since the last AFD and creation attempt (fun fact: I was not born yet for the first two AFDs, which shows how those are no longer relevant). Additional coverage has been released since then, and I believe that he now undoubtly meets the criteria of the general notability guideline. My three sources are from The Independent, South China Morning Post, and Tatler. Additionally, he has magazine coverage from Town & Country and The List, but I am unsure whether or not those are considered extremely reliable to count towards it.

If you have notability concerns, I ask for you to please let me know before proceeding; I'm aware that this article's creation is contentous and has been challenged in the past.

Also, further disclosure that I am a motorsport editor, and have never previously edited relating to the royal family. I'm also American, so take that as you want. I believe grammar/formatting should comply with typical royal articles, but I apologize if they do not. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 19:43, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Dclemens1971 talk 16:41, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Queen Elizabeth II's grand-nephew underwent 200 hours of training in India to become a yoga instructor?

• Source: https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3182802/meet-samuel-chatto-queen-elizabeths-heartthrob

• • Reviewed:
  • Comment: Alternative phrasing for the hook could be something along the lines of "[..] underwent 200 hours of yoga teacher training in India?

Created by GalacticVelocity08 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 20:00, 12 September 2025 (UTC).

• I have removed a sentence that struck me as unnecessary (or inappropriate) in an encyclopedia and now the article does not meet the minimum size requirement. But even with that sentence, I would not accept it as long enough because the lead repeats the content of the body. I am also not convinced that this article meets our notability criteria, and I will note that it has already been deleted once. Surtsicna (talk) 15:48, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

• I do understand your concern about the personal life sentence; to add some context, I included it because it is a noticeable portion of sources available about him. If it was just an Instagram post or something then obviously it would not be included, but it was reported on by two notable magazines, and not just some random thing that happened. I do understand your point, though. In terms of the lead section, I was not aware that it doesn't count; I used the page size feature as was recommended in DYK policies, so I figured that it would count if pagesize counted it as such and the DYK nom page marked it as meeting the prose requirement. The AfD you are talking about was done back in 2008, and Chatto has received noticeably more coverage now than he did over a decade and a half ago (when he was twelve). If you think that this nom has no chance of passing then I understand, but if there's a possibility to expand it to meet the prose requirement then I'd like to at least make an attempt to do such. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 16:46, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

The lead section in such short articles merely inflates the character count. I actually do not see the point in having sections here. They are all single paragraphs. The subject's notability is actually not DYK criteria; that is for the AfD process to decide if the article is again nominated for deletion. If enough can be written about him to satisy DYK criteria, then it might even serve as proof of notability. Surtsicna (talk) 19:06, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Moving on from the notability talk, is there any way you think this has a chance of passing? I could probably go into more detail about names of the places where his work has been displayed, but that feels like just adding trivia/blabber that isn't concise. I won't be upset if this fails as I knew going into this that it would be a longshot, but I'd rather not waste more time on this if that's the only outcome. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Quite frankly, GalacticVelocity08, virtually anything and anyone connected to the British royal family is likely to pass the interestingness criterion. The question here is whether the article can be expanded to contain at least 1500 characters of non-repetitive, on-topic content that references reliable sources and not gossip magazines. To me that seems doubtful, but if you are able to pull it off, it will be a pass. Surtsicna (talk) 09:30, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

• (section break) Following another user's edit to remove the section headers (diff) and a little bit of expansion, I believe it now meets the 1500 bytes of prose requirement. Since there are no sections, I believe that the lead section now counts since it is not repeating anything else in the article. Everything is properly sourced with inline citations. I'm not sure what you consider to be "gossip magazines", so almost everything has two refs just to be safe and show verifiability. From my limited personal experience I think that Tatler, The List and Town & Country would be reliable and not just purely gossip, but you may disagree. Let me know if there are any other issues that need to be fixed, and thank you for being patient with this. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 14:16, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

The sources at which I am turning my nose up are all well-known publications and none of them are proscribed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, which I would expect them to be if the community found them to be unreliable. Therefore I have little ground for rejecting them. I would suggest spelling out the subject's name in the hook. Otherwise the article is fresh and now just about sufficiently long. I see no copyright or neutrality issues. Approved. Surtsicna (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I greatly appreciate the review. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 16:25, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

"His own website"

This is mentioned in the text but not linked and I can't actually find it. Does anyone know the domain? Robin S. Taylor (talk) 23:39, 13 July 2026 (UTC)