Talk:Prince Ernst August of Hanover
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Title of page
This page should not be at Ernst August (VI) of Hanover. Until his father dies, he is just Ernst August, Prince of Hanover (Ernst August Prinz von Hanover in German). Prsgoddess187 00:08, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
- Prince Ernst August of Hanover (heir apparent) → Prince Ernst August of Hanover … Rationale: Prince Ernst August of Hanover exists as a redirect to a disambiguation page, however, I feel it would be best used for Ernst August, Prince of Hanover's son. It eliminates the heir apparent note and it also distinguishes between the head of the house versus a member of the house. —Charles 01:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- Support As nominator Charles 01:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose See discussion. Caerwine Caerwhine 11:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support This name is inherently POV, and we should not use it. Septentrionalis 16:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
- Since Prince Ernst August of Hanover is only a redirect, I feel it should be used as the title of this page. A link to the disambiguation page could be provided at the top of the page. Charles 01:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- The current title may be clunky, but until papa dies, which considering his condition could be a day or decade from now, his father, if anyone would have the best claim to the proposed place it would be moved to. Once papa dies moving the article to Prince Ernst August VI of Hanover would be appropriate along with removing the redirect from the current name. Caerwine Caerwhine 11:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Ernest August is *the* Prince of Hanover, that is why the title is appended to the end of his name. EA Jr. is not The Prince of Hanover, he is a Prince of Hanover. Charles 16:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- The suggested future move is inappropriate; Wikipedia is not a recognition agency for pretenders. 16:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Holy crap, this is confusing. I have no idea what you are all talking about, can we have an explanation for an Australian who has no idea about royalty jargon. Mainly, why is it POV.--liquidGhoul 03:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)