Talk:Charles
|
|
Zoe, Prince Harry is on the list because "Charles" is in his full name. I'll includes all nobles currently on Wikipedia and having "Charles" in their names. I prefer cleaning up the ~2000 "Charles"-containing articles than discussing how we should naming those articles on Wikipedia:History standards and expect people to follow it. New users will most likely derive their way of title nomenclature. By the time they notice the unified standard onWikipedia:History standards, the misnamed articles have already buried in the bulk of ever increasing number of wikipedian articles. I doubt they would reorganize those articles, which is a tedious process. Putting those names and creating pages of this kind (like Louis etc.) saving everybody's time. Kt2
- Ktsquare -- I sincerely disagree. It's better to clean up messes that are there than to create new ones. And the Harry rationale just doesn't add up. JHK
- I curiously don't understand how it does not add up. If someone just know a word or two of his full name, typing Charles will lead one here where one can copy the correct link.
I am getting incredibly frustrated with this stuff. How the HELL did Charlemagne become Charles I of France? THat is absolute bollocks! He was also NEVER Holy Roman Emperor. He was King of the Franks and Roman Emperor. That's it. Would whoever is responsible for this travesty please STOP? Not all lists of kings and genealogies are historically accurate -- I don't know what sources you are using, but either they are very out of date or there is a problem with their interpretation.
Uploading tons of information about which you are unsure is also probably not helpful in the long run.
It does not help to have disambiguation pages and lists of rulers if they aren't correct. JHK
Calm down, let me explain..... I agree that Charles I of France did not exist as a person but Charlemagne is considered as "Charles I" when sequencing the Charles of France. Similar idea for Holy Roman Emperors. Accoring to Le Petit Larousse which I am reading now:
- Empereur
- Charles Ier ----> Charlemagne
- Charles II, empereur d'Occident ---> Charles II le Chauve, roi de France.
- Charles III le Gros....
- Charles IV de Luxembourg....
- Charles V, dit Charles Quint....
- France
- Charles Ier ----> Charlemagne
- Charles II le Chauve ....(details of Charles the Bald)
and under Charlemagne:
- Charlemagne ou Charles Ier le Grand (747 - Aix-la-Chapelle 814), roi des Francs (King of Franks) (768-814), empereur d'Occident (Western) Roman Emperor (800-814).....
yeah, take it easy. Take that up with the people long dead now that numbered them as such. But if he wasnt considered Holy Roman Emperor, then all the other monarchs' numbering named Charles after him would be thrown out of wack. Espeically when you consider Charles V is basically known by that numbering, and he would not be as such if Charlenange was not counted. Likewise with the Charles kings of France.
moved from page:
This page was created to set examples of naming nobles, abiding by the standards commonly agreed in Wikipedia:History standards. Anyone may type in [[Charles]] and will be led here. They can then pick the according links from the editing page (http://www.wikipedia.com/w/wiki.phtml?title=Charles&action=edit).
11:32, 29 Aug 2003 . . MyRedDice
Added:
Charl (Afrikaans)
I know this because my name is Charl and it is common in South Africa. The french influence in South Africa from the Huguenots maintained the French pronunciation (i.e. Sharl) but the 'es' was lost over time.