New Post
Search
HelpThis seems to have been disproven. (m)
in reply to a message by Starstrider
According to a moderator of /r/namenerds on Reddit:
"That isn't the case. You have to add -0 at the end of the link to get to their webpage. https://www.royal.uk/prince-albert-0 takes you to the page of Prince Consort Albert. George and Charlotte's pages have the same quirk."
The permalink to their comment is right here: https://www.reddit.com/r/namenerds/comments/8f5l97/the_royal_familys_website_may_have_just/dy0tfvz/
Also, this was the top story on the website of the Daily Mail only a few hours ago, but by now you can no longer find it anywhere on their website. It seems to me that they have removed it, either because they were wrong or because the royal family did not appreciate this level of intrusiveness (which I have to agree is rather creepy and disrespectful).
Either way, time will tell if the media were on the right track or not - but for now, I would take their "evidence" with a grain of salt.
"How do you pick up the threads of an old life? How do you go on... when in your heart you begin to understand... there is no going back? There are some things that time cannot mend... some hurts that go too deep... that have taken hold." ~ Frodo Baggins
"That isn't the case. You have to add -0 at the end of the link to get to their webpage. https://www.royal.uk/prince-albert-0 takes you to the page of Prince Consort Albert. George and Charlotte's pages have the same quirk."
The permalink to their comment is right here: https://www.reddit.com/r/namenerds/comments/8f5l97/the_royal_familys_website_may_have_just/dy0tfvz/
Also, this was the top story on the website of the Daily Mail only a few hours ago, but by now you can no longer find it anywhere on their website. It seems to me that they have removed it, either because they were wrong or because the royal family did not appreciate this level of intrusiveness (which I have to agree is rather creepy and disrespectful).
Either way, time will tell if the media were on the right track or not - but for now, I would take their "evidence" with a grain of salt.
"How do you pick up the threads of an old life? How do you go on... when in your heart you begin to understand... there is no going back? There are some things that time cannot mend... some hurts that go too deep... that have taken hold." ~ Frodo Baggins
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
When I posted this it was 7 minutes after this article came out and it was the first one mentioning it, seems that the article was updated not long after to mention Charlotte and George's webpage having the same message after I posted about it. Obviously it means nothing then because as you mentioned the actual links for George and Charlotte needs a -0 at the end which is why Prince Albert's link without the -0 gives the access denied message.
Prince Albert's link with the -0 at the end gives you the historical Prince Albert. So yeah this all means nothing, the baby might end up being Prince Albert or it might not, there is no evidence to prove or disprove anything at this point. Thanks for mentioning it.
-----------
Prince Albert's link with the -0 at the end gives you the historical Prince Albert. So yeah this all means nothing, the baby might end up being Prince Albert or it might not, there is no evidence to prove or disprove anything at this point. Thanks for mentioning it.
-----------
This message was edited 4/26/2018, 7:11 PM
1