Talk:Tsarevich Dmitry Ivanovich of Russia (1552–1553)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 6 November 2023[edit]

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) Bensci54 (talk) 21:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


– Per the outcome of this discussion in which the community did not agree on the inclusion of the prefix "Tsarevna" before the names of Russian princesses. I firmly believe that we should not make an exception for the male counterparts. The omission of "Tsarevich" will have no effect on the subjects' recognizability. Keivan.fTalk 00:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Jenks24 (talk) 10:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Patronymics are a fixture of Russian names and removing the titles decontextualizes who these people were and creates ambiguity. Peter Petrovich of Russia applies to both Tsarevich Peter Petrovich of Russia and Emperor Peter II. Ivan Ivanovich likewise creates similar ambiguities that include some older historical figures. That discussion was up for an inordinately long time and a stream of opposing votes trickled after a late relisting. The closing of the discussion amounted to little more than head counting instead of checking up on present policy and styles for these types of articles. Killuminator (talk) 06:51, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Peter Petrovich of Russia applies to both Tsarevich Peter Petrovich of Russia and Emperor Peter II. We all know Peter II is the primary topic. This is something that can be easily resolved with a hate note and/or the inclusion of birth/death dates in the title for the article on the tsarevich. That discussion was up for an inordinately long time and a stream of opposing votes trickled after a late relisting. True. But I don't see the outcome changing at the moment. We can have a comprehensive RM in the future that covers both males and females but for now, I can't see why we should utilize two different formats for males vs females. Keivan.fTalk 13:10, 6 November 2023 (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.