Talk:Charles I: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Hayford Peirce (→Naming policy: you're right on this, as far as I recall) |
imported>Peter Jackson |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I do not know what the naming policy for royalty is, and therefore one of the changes I have made may need to be changed back again. I have redirected "Charles I (Britain)"* to Charles I, on the grounds that other king Charleses would in fact be known by different names in their own countries: Carlos, Carolus, Karl. If this change is undone, then the page name for Charles I would have to be changed also. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 20:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC) *Just to be pedantic (why not?) "Charles I (Britain)" is incorrect, because he was king of two separate kingdoms, England and Scotland. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 21:14, 26 May 2013 (UTC) | I do not know what the naming policy for royalty is, and therefore one of the changes I have made may need to be changed back again. I have redirected "Charles I (Britain)"* to Charles I, on the grounds that other king Charleses would in fact be known by different names in their own countries: Carlos, Carolus, Karl. If this change is undone, then the page name for Charles I would have to be changed also. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 20:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC) *Just to be pedantic (why not?) "Charles I (Britain)" is incorrect, because he was king of two separate kingdoms, England and Scotland. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 21:14, 26 May 2013 (UTC) | ||
:There was a long discussion about this several years ago, when we had a lot more contributors, and the consensus, I believe was that it should be done just as you have done. Some people quibbled about it, and even disagreed strongly, but that's how it was decided. The basis, being, I think, that this is an English-speaking encyc. and that the customary English usage with names should be followed. In any case, thanks for your contributions! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 21:34, 26 May 2013 (UTC) | :There was a long discussion about this several years ago, when we had a lot more contributors, and the consensus, I believe was that it should be done just as you have done. Some people quibbled about it, and even disagreed strongly, but that's how it was decided. The basis, being, I think, that this is an English-speaking encyc. and that the customary English usage with names should be followed. In any case, thanks for your contributions! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 21:34, 26 May 2013 (UTC) | ||
::What about French, where it's spelt the same? Admittedly, Charles I of France would go under [[Charlemagne]]. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 09:12, 28 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:12, 28 May 2013
Naming policy
I do not know what the naming policy for royalty is, and therefore one of the changes I have made may need to be changed back again. I have redirected "Charles I (Britain)"* to Charles I, on the grounds that other king Charleses would in fact be known by different names in their own countries: Carlos, Carolus, Karl. If this change is undone, then the page name for Charles I would have to be changed also. --Martin Wyatt 20:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC) *Just to be pedantic (why not?) "Charles I (Britain)" is incorrect, because he was king of two separate kingdoms, England and Scotland. --Martin Wyatt 21:14, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
- There was a long discussion about this several years ago, when we had a lot more contributors, and the consensus, I believe was that it should be done just as you have done. Some people quibbled about it, and even disagreed strongly, but that's how it was decided. The basis, being, I think, that this is an English-speaking encyc. and that the customary English usage with names should be followed. In any case, thanks for your contributions! Hayford Peirce 21:34, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
- What about French, where it's spelt the same? Admittedly, Charles I of France would go under Charlemagne. Peter Jackson 09:12, 28 May 2013 (UTC)