Talk:Elizabeth I

title

I think the title "Elizabeth I" is better than "Elizabeth I (England)" because Elisabeth of Bohemia (1292-1330) has a different spelling and is not numbered "I"; "The Winter Queen", Elizabeth of Bohemia (1596-1662) has a z but not a "I". We need to keep readers in mind: 999/1000 will be looking for Elizabeth I not the other VERY obscure women. We do not want users to think her name was "Elizabeth I (England)" which will make them look stupid in college papers.Richard Jensen 23:20, 12 April 2008 (CDT)

Well, if they copy and paste from our article...Still, I tend to agree-Derek Hodges 23:42, 12 April 2008 (CDT)

I don't necessarily disagree that this name is fine for the article on the Faerie Queen. However..

Your remark about "We do not want users to think her name was 'Elizabeth I (England)' which will make them look stupid in college papers" could equally apply to all other articles with names of the form "Name RomanDigit (Country)", no? So are you now saying we shouldn't use that form for any other pages, for that reason? And if it is acceptable for other pages, why not for "Elizabeth I (England)"? I don't understand the seeming inconsistency. J. Noel Chiappa 00:12, 13 April 2008 (CDT)

I think a title like "Tom IX (England)" should be avoided because it misleads people into thinking that is what they should call the person in their termpapers. However if we also have a Tom IX from France we must do something, and "Tom IX (England)" and "Tom IX (France)" is the least bad alternative, in my opinion. This situation is caused by our policy of translating names into English, so that the Spanish king named Carlos II becomes Charles II in CZ, which is identical to an English king. (I agree with the English-translation policy, but it does cause this problem in a fairly small number of cases.) There is no reason to have "Elizabeth I (England)" because there really is no other Elizabeth I. Richard Jensen 01:18, 13 April 2008 (CDT)