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