Editing you own article is not forbidden but is strongly discouraged. There is no problem with Charles or William correcting an error of this nature anonymously. A problem could arise if they begin intensive editing in order to remove negative information or add positive information. As the article is watched there is little danger of plainly false negative information remaining anyway. In more ordinary situations, as no one may be watching the article false negative information may linger for a very long time and the temptation will arise to remove it themselves or try by complaining to get it removed. If basically the only published material about a person is some negative incident they are in a bad fix. Other facts about them are not sourced or notable.
One usual problem of autobiographical articles is not present here. Charles is notable so the vanity page problem doesn't arise. Their problem is quite different. If they are caught editing their pages especially with respect to point of view they will look bad, not dignified, and dignity is their prime asset.
Fred
On Nov 16, 2005, at 10:53 PM, Tom Cadden wrote:
I just thought of a real example. According to websites the world over the Prince of Wales's name is Charles Windsor. In reality, as his own office confirmed when it was being checked for Wikipedia, it is actually Charles Mountbatten-Windsor. We are one of the few correct sources of information on the net about it.
Every so often someone comes along and does one of those damned google searches (god but those things 'prove' such crap!) and changes the article to say he is Charles Windsor. Before those of us who constantly correct it find the change, Charles himself or William (both of whom surf the net) find the mistake. Would WP allow them to correct the error?
BTW Wikipedia HAS been read in Buckingham Palace, as I found when checking with BP about something for an article here. I mentioned us but before I even got a chance to say who what we were, the person I was speaking to came back 'oh yes. The big online encyclopædia. It is really quite good. We've seen it here.'
BTW the Queen is an avid net surfer. Who knows? She may be one of our anonymous Wikipedians. Maybe she is on this list for all we know. (If she is, Hi Ma'am!) lol
Thom