Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)/Archive 16

message: The examples in the proposed policy shows an Anglocentric POV. Kings (and Queens) of England after 1536 (including Henry VIII) were legally Kings of Ireland as well while Kings of England after 1603 were also Kings of Scotland. After 1707 until 1801, Kings of Great Britain remained Kings of Ireland. The full title of the UK was of "Great Britain and Ireland". Therefore the correct style (in terms of historical reference books) would be "Elizabeth I of England and Ireland", "Anne of England, Ireland and Scotland", "George I of Great Britain and Ireland", etc.--Andrew L 22:24, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Where a monarch has reigned over a number of states, use the most commonly associated ones. For example, "Charles II of England", not "Charles II of England, Scotland and Ireland". 
Now that may be POV to say that England is "the most commonly associated one" but as they all chose to spend most of their time in England (with possible exception of King Billy) England is most probably the most common association. --Philip Baird Shearer 16:27, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The numericals will be wrong in some cases too Fornadan (t) 21:59, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Kings of Ireland and Scotland

message: I would like to try and rename most of the articles on the spouses of Royal Peers (ex. Sophie, Countess of Wessex; Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall; Brigitte, Duchess of Gloucester; Katharine, Duchess of Kent) this is because in case you have not realized with these articles located where they are it implies that they are Royal divorceès.(such as Sarah, Duchess of York or Diana, Princess of Wales) Which they arent. what I propose is to make a simple change and move these articles to [name], the [Duchess of..., Countess of..., Princess of....etc.], this is the more correct and accurate location for these articles. I would apreciate it if you could let me know your ideas, and maybe we could bring it to a vote. Thanks Mac Domhnaill
:I support the idea of change. Saying Sophie, Countess of Wessex actually means Sophie, formerly Countess of Wessex, aka the Earl of Wessex's ex-wife. (That is where the Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York comes from.) That form was laid down as the form for royal ex-wives by the Queen in 1996 (I forget whether it was by Order-in-Council or some other means, but the form was agreed if I remember correctly just before Charles and Diana's divorce). 
:Royal husbands don't need the the: no-one is going to think that Charles, Prince of Wales means Charles, the ex-husband of the Prince of Wales! But our royal bride naming is factually wrong and confusing. After all, how can we explain that Diana, Princess of Wales means, Diana, the ex-wife of the Prince of Wales but Sophie, Countess of Wessex means Sophie, the current wife of the Earl of Wessex, especially when Diana was never called Diana, Princess of Wales during her marriage!  This sort of thing breeds confusion when an encyclopædia should be bringing clarity. FearÉIREANN 02:32, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  I started some of these articles, but not at their present titles. Deb 17:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree as well.  It is extremely confusing the way it is now.  I would only change one thing with the proposal.  Would it be possible to make it [Name], [The Countess of ...].  As most of the British royals are styled as The Countess (Duchess or whatever), this would keep it consistent.  For the deceased consorts, we can use the lower case 'the' to show the differnce.  Any ideas??? Prsgoddess187 18:19, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wives of Royal Peers