Talk:Christian I of Denmark

message: There seems to be a problem on the page with his mother, referred to as both Helvig and hedwig, of different places. There is currently no article about her, but there is a redirect from one of the names back to here, and a mention on the genealogy of the UK Royal Family page. Anyone who knows which form is more appropriate could perhaps change this page so that at least it only uses one form of the name consistently? Sandpiper 23:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have created a separate section for his genealogy. This stuff seems to have been inserted by one editor who did a lot of work on several pages of related royalty. Unfortunately he seems to have left in two version of the same paragraph, which are both somewhat confusing. Partly because everyong seems to have several titles at once depending on which jurisdiction you are discussing, but also confusing language. anyone HELP! Sandpiper 01:25, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family tree...Help!.  

message: The information about what was happening when Christian was king in Sweden seems somewhat different in this article than in the one on Charles of Sweden. That's the Charles who both preceded and followed him as king of Sweden. Oh dear. In particular, there seems to be a different named bishop running the country as regent. Sandpiper 01:25, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Swedish brief Reign

message: It says that he was (presumably) over 2 metres. That information comes from a pillar in Roskilde Cathedral where he is cited as 2,19 metres. Recent investigations have shown, however, that this is wrong and he was most likely 1,88 metres. High for his time, but not THAT high!
Roskilde Cathedral themselves says that his height is wrong: http://www.roskildedomkirke.dk/historie/kirkernes-historie/roskilde-domkirke
And a Danish magazine about history corrects the error more precisely: http://www.altomhistorie.dk/q-a/var-christian-1-over-to-meter/
The national media centre, Danmarks Radio, discusses it in the fact-check program "Detektor": http://www.dr.dk/tv/se/detektor-tv/detektor-64#!/20:45
Is a tv program or a magazine a proper source for Wiki, or do I need to find the original report?
Polkaface (talk) 21:08, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The statement in the article appears to be unsourced. Your sources would be an improvement on no sources at all. DrKiernan (talk) 21:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height 

message: Which Oldenburg, was Christian I born in? The article points it to Oldenburg (city), which is not the same Oldenburg (of Schleswig-Holstein) that the other later kings of Denmark were born in or associated with. Is this because an editor arbitrarily assumed it to be the current city, seeing his birthplace as Oldenburg, made that decision from the two possibilities about which place to designate as his birthplace, which is not necessarily correct? Either it needs to be verified or somehow marked as indeterminant... Stevenmitchell (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which Oldenburg? 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 12:31, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: pages with content, such as Fredericks VI, VII, VIII and IX, are ineligible to be proposed titles in move requests unless they, too, are formally dispositioned. So entries such as ":Frederick VI → " (et al.) have been added to this request to meet that requirement. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 00:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Support for Christian V-X - there are no other monarchs with these names. Oppose for Christian I-IV and Frederick IV-IX, where there are other monarchs of the same name and ordinal and while the Danish monarchs are probably the most important, I don't think it's obvious that they're the primary topic or that much is gained by carrying on an eternal argument about it. Furius (talk) 21:53, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Support. All ten Christians are pre-existing primary topics. The four listed Fredericks would also be presumable primary topics based on pageviews  estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:09, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

text: oppose per arguments at Talk:Edward_I_of_England#Requested_move_5_November_2023—blindlynx 22:36, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Support all of them.  Killuminator (talk) 00:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

text: oppose I agree with blindlynx. Dimadick (talk) 22:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Support as either unambiguous or clear primary topics. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose for similar reasons as Edward I, et al. The primacy of a number of these seems questionable (per Furius above), and retaining the country makes for a better title, regardless of any recent amendments to NCROY.  ╠╣uw [talk] 14:43, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose - Best we stay with the "Monarch # of country" style, so our readers will know what country these Danish monarchs are reigning over, via page title. GoodDay (talk) 03:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose per arguments at Talk:Edward_I_of_England#Requested_move_11_June_2021 (I believe I laid out my position more clearly in the previous RM there). Incidentally, what was the reason for excluding Frederick V? Srnec (talk) 21:10, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly because of the existence of Frederick V of the Palatinate. 2601:249:9301:D570:E5EE:3E19:A141:10D5 (talk) 01:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I found Frederick of the Palatinate to significant to ignore. The other rulers share a name and regnal number with minor dukes and counts, but the Elector Palatine was quite a significant figure in European history. Векочел (talk) 17:19, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose per Bekoyen and blindlynx. History6042 (talk) 02:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose (procedural) This RM proposes moving eighteen articles based on WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. A PRIMARYTOPIC move should provide evidence that the proposed title is the primary topic, which has not been done here. It may be the case that some or all of the proposed titles are the primary topic, but it is unreasonable to expect editors to research eighteen titles at once. Put simply, the scope of the RM is too broad to have a hope of being conducted effectively. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:15, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose per GoodDay and my arguments at the recent Edward I of England RM, which I feel hold up here too. A WP:TRAINWRECK too. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose per others. Based on the comments above and the recently closed  Talk:Edward_I_of_England#Requested_move_11_June_2021 there is clearly no consensus to move. Vpab15 (talk) 23:14, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 26 November 2023 

message: A request: May we please wait until one RM is closed, before opening up another, on these monarch pages? At the very least, notify editors at WP:ROY, so editors won't miss them. Yeah, I know there's WP:RM, btw. GoodDay (talk) 03:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion