Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Titles of European monarchs: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
InedibleHulk (talk | contribs) →Survey: Status quo, yo. |
Egsan Bacon (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 129:
*'''Option 9''' - always a merry-go-round with many proposed moves, but [[WP:COMMONNAME]] is by far the most reasonable as there is no size fits all, as it depends on the individual on question
*'''Option 3'''. Consistency is key. A reader should be able to tell they're reading an article about a monarch from the title of the article. It also prevents unnecessary conversations wasting Wikipedia's most valuable resource, the time of Wikipedia's editors, who are all volunteering their time, after all. Conversations about the titles of the article of monarchs where the claim that one of them is the primary topic and should just be ''Name III'' tend to attract discussion of the sort all too frequent at requested moves that tends have the underlying assumption that country X's things are more important that country Y's things, so naturally they should be the primary topic. Conversations based on the monarch being the only one with that name just encourage the former. Setting a consistent process for the names of a class of article prevents all that and saves so much time and the possibility of rancor. We have too much petty nationalism on Wikipedia already, we can at least close off this one avenue for it.
:Additionally, '''Option 9 is the least suitable of all''', as Common name simply doesn't work for this, as it's irrelevant because it's unusable. To use the example of the king at the top of the RFC, last king of the ''[[ancien régime]]'', his common name ''isn't'' "Louis XVI" ''or'' "Louis XVI of France", it's "Louis". Just "Louis". A writer will only specify anything beyond their name when there's the possibility of confusion. We're certainly not going to call his article "Louis". That this comes up at all is a misunderstanding of COMMONNAME, which is only useful for monarchs in extremely rare circumstances, such as someone suggesting "Charlemagne" should be "Charles I" or any disambiguated form of that. Otherwise it just leads to a great many conversations which do nothing but waste valuable editor time.
:To sum up, I'd rank the options: '''3 > 4 through 8 (no preference) >>>>> 2 > 1 >> 9''' [[User:Egsan Bacon|Egsan Bacon]] ([[User talk:Egsan Bacon|talk]]) 19:02, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
==Discussion==
| |||