This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a
WikiProject related to all activities of the
NorthGermanic peoples, both in
Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the
Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Show us any respectable source which uses "Philip Halsten". This monster creature for a name seems to be a product of Wikipedia. Hope no more inexpertised people perpetuate this.
Marrtel12:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)reply
Indeed, it should be
Filip Halstensson and his brother
Inge Halstensson as his father is
Halsten Stenkilsson. And, of course, his uncle should be
Inge Stenkilsson. Apart from the
WP:OR in the MoS, what justifies using a name unknown in
WP:RS ? The MoS is normative but No Original Research and Reliable Sources are prescriptive. In any case, the use of patronyms reduces confusion in the case of Early and High Medieval Scandinavia, and others, where primogeniture is not common.
Angus McLellan(Talk)12:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)reply
Well, I am no friend of patronymics in aticle names, except in Russian context. I regard a patronymic similar to a nickname, and to be used only in limited circumstances. Well, he is king "Philip of Sweden", thus no dspute should arise whether that is correct or not.
Marrtel13:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)reply
Patronymics and epithets are perfectly good ways of disambiguating people, widely used by historians. They are especially common for Medieval Scandinavia, far more so than the arbitrary and inaccurate regnal numbers concocted in the distant past. I can find two or three reliable sources which call the subject Filip Halstensson, The Cambridge History of Scandinavia for example. Apart from the MoS, what backing is there for the article name you have chosen ?
Angus McLellan(Talk)13:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)reply
Requested move
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Philip Halstensson →
Philip of Sweden — Phonetically difficult Swedish patronymics have been removed from
all other article names of Swedish monarchs. Kíngs' articles should not have nondescript names that look like they are out of a Stockholm phone book - Joe Schmoe. There has been no other Philip of Sweden, but many different Philip Halstenssons. Above all, consistency please!
SergeWoodzing (
talk)
05:18, 6 June 2010 (UTC)reply
The conventional name referred to when this was last moved is a Swedish-language name. This king is virtually unknown in English literature.
SergeWoodzing (
talk)
05:24, 6 June 2010 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Requested move 29 May 2024
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.
My impression is that modern literature typically leaves the names of the medieval kings (pre-1500) unanglicized. Between 1500 and 1900 anglicized forms are common for some kings, especially for those with the name Charles. After 1900, kings are again not anglicized. I think we should not put much effort into making medieval and post-1500 titles consistent with each other.
Jähmefyysikko (
talk)
05:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
"Adolf Frederick" is good enough title for Britannica, so it does seem possible that the Swedish king is the
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. But I agree that the presented evidence might not be sufficient yet. Using
WP:SMALLDIFF, an alternative would be
Adolf Fredrik, which is more unambiguous, redirects to the king and is actually more common
in Ngrams.
The choice between an anglicized and local name is discussed in
WP:UE, which does not give any preference for the anglicized one, but tells that we should use the most common form in reliable English-language sources.
Jähmefyysikko (
talk)
05:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Looking at the history, it redirected to
Adolf Frederick of Sweden and had done so since its creation in 2005 – before being moved this morning to Adolph Frederick in order to make way for the dab page, which in turn was at Adolf Friedrich until this morning. @
Srnec, could you explain your rationale in making these moves now rather than waiting for the conclusion of this RM?
Rosbif73 (
talk)
16:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Only two of the articles on the dab page have the German form "Adolf Friedrich" in the title. That was my justification for moving. Note that I didn't touch
Adolf Frederik.
Srnec (
talk)
17:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
A not unreasonable rationale, on the face of it – except that the Swedish king had been the
WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT since 2005. Moreover, you don't explain why you chose to do this now, rather than waiting for the conclusion of this RM, and given that
WP:NCROY-related RMs have been touchy topics of late.
Rosbif73 (
talk)
19:19, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
If that's the only justification, then I suggest we revert the change of primary topic for
Adolf Frederick by moving the dab page to
Adolf Frederick (disambiguation). The Swedish king dominates in e.g. Google Books results, and most of those namesakes barely have an English source in their articles, which is an indication that they are not discussed in English literature much.
Jähmefyysikko (
talk)
03:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I entirely agree, the Swedish king is definitely the primary topic, and was the uncontested primary redirect from 2005 until Srnec's recent change.
Rosbif73 (
talk)
06:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Still Oppose. For consistency I would do the opposite, i.e. renaming Birger to "Birger of Sweden" etc. It is the most clear and unambiguous, and consistent with other article titles of Swedish monarchs. --
Marbe166 (
talk)
08:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose as per Marbe. We need clarity not more phonetic-linguistic confusion & clutter. There has only been ine Swedish king by the name. --
SergeWoodzing (
talk)
18:19, 14 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. Let me problematize the current article title
Philip of Sweden a bit.
GBooks Search for "Philip of Sweden" in post-1950 English literature returns very few results, all of them low quality (we have geneological tables, fiction, listings, and incorrect references to a
tsar candidate). This indicates that the construction "Philip of Sweden" is based on WP conventions only and not on any external sources. It is dubious whether such uncommon title satisfies the
naturalness criterion. In comparison, the results for "Filip Halstensson" include Cambridge History of Scandinavia and a pair of books from Brill. Some other 11th and 12th century kings have an article title with a patronymic, so the format "{name} {patronymic}" is at least as consistent as "{name} of Sweden".
Jähmefyysikko (
talk)
16:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.