Talk:Frederick III, German Emperor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Germany Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)


Contents

[edit] Titling

Why move Friedrich III of Germany to Friedrich of Germany? Surely if there's a reason to move it it should be documented? -- Someone else 23:45 Dec 23, 2002 (UTC)

Indeed. And if it happens, the person who does it should change the article to reflect the move. -- Zoe

I think he is Friedrich III as the German Empire followed the Prussian numbering

Fonzy, I'm wondering why you moved Friedrich III of Germany to Friedrich of Germany. It seems to me that Friedrich III of Germany is the better choice. -- Someone else 21:24 Dec 24, 2002 (UTC)

As there was no Friedrich I or II of Germany. -fonzy (unless i am mistaken)

But who calls him Friedrich of Germany? The III is used to distinguish him from the various Friedrichs of Prussia, of which Germany is a successor state.... I think he is always referred to as Friedrich III, but I'm willing to be educated.... -- Someone else

Acording to this book i own with lists of lots of world leaders, it says the 3 kings of Germany were:(Note they names are the English Aquivilent)

  • William I
  • Frederick
  • William II

And The New York Times Almanac lists him as Frederick III. My understanding is that the article name should reflect how the person is most frequently referred to. If it's "Frederick of Germany" that's fine, but it's peculiar that the article does not refer to him as Frederick of Germany other than in its title, and it would be good to explain the reasons moves are made in the "Talk" page, and include any alternative names in the article itself. Part of the problem is that "Germany" keeps springing, phoenix-like, from the ashes of its former incarnations, yet the numbering of its leaders reflects not only their role in Germany but their other titles: thus the Hohenzollerns are generally referred to (if anglicized) as Frederick William, Frederick III, Frederick I, Frederick William I, Frederick II, Frederick William II, Frederick William III, Frederick William IV, William I, Frederick III, and William II, in that order .... -- Someone else

hmm well i dotn knwo much about that side of history i just prefer frederich of Germany as he he was the only one of modern Germany. -fonzy

If it's just a personal preference, then, I'll move him back to his more common name and leave "Friedrich of Germany" as a redirect. I'll move all this chat to HIS talk page, so you can delete it here if you don't want it cluttering up YOUR talk page! --- Someone else

the Hohenzollerns were Kings of Prussia at the same time that they were Emperors of Germany (the German Empire was composed of separate kingdoms) so Friedrich was King Friedrich III of Prussia and at the same time Emperor Friedrich I of Germany PMelvilleAustin 22:38 Jan 19, 2003 (UTC)

No he wasn't, he was Emperor Friedrich III as well, even though he was the first German emperor of that name. Känsterle 12:43, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)


I read somewhere, i cant remember where, that Frederick was in a coma all of his short reign, can anyone confirm this?

tate

Yes, that's correct. *glances at article* Well, I thought it mentioned that. Mackensen (talk) 23:14, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] God damned people moving articles

Can people just not move articles without explaining why, and without notifying of an intent to move on the talk page? While I would agree that the page as it was formerly titled was somewhat ambiguous, the new title is terrible. I'd prefer Friedrich III, German Emperor, and moving the other two German Emperors to similar locations. If not that, then I'd much prefer Friedrich III of Germany (1831-1888). john k 23:32, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I suggest that this page should be moved to another title again, since Friedrich III, German Emperor facilitates confusion with Frederick III, Holy Roman Emperor. At the very least, their should a line explaining the problem and a link. Martg76 10:18, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
There should be a dab link, but it should not determine name. I am waiting to put one in until the move is decided. Septentrionalis 17:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, note that the previous title of the page (Friedrich III of Germany (Hohenzollern)) isn't that uncommon. Just look at the List of rulers of Austria, where there are many such cases, e.g. Leopold V of Austria (Babenberg) and Leopold V of Austria (Habsburg), since they started to count from one again when the Habsburgs took over . Martg76 10:31, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Coma Comment Removed...

I removed the Coma Comment about Friedrich brief rule of Germany.

These are some the of the things he did before he died. 1) Attended Crown Council meetings. He used notes to ask questions or answer them. 2) Confirme Bismark as Chancellor and Minister President. 3) Gave his wife the Order of the Black Eagle, the highest prussian award only can be given by the King of Prussia. 4) Received Queen Victoria on her vist to Germany. Attended the wedding of his son Henry to the Princess Iren of Hesse. 5) Received King Oscar of Sweden.

None of which can be done if you are in a coma. Note that the last event occured on June 13, two days before Fredericks death.

He was Frederick III of Prussia, and reigned as Frederick I of Germany, but is more often referred to as his Prussian regnal number with his german regnal title, IIRC. The article's title should be changed to reflect his German regnal title, as that was the highest of his titles. -Alex 12.220.157.93 11:07, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] No mention of Friedrich-III's more enlightened vision of Germany?

Perhaps I am blinded by the fact that I am both German AND a huge fan of Kaiser Friedrich-III but I wonder why there is no mention of how he and his wife wanted to change the Empire? Is it for reasons of space? Had Friedrich-III survived with his wife to lead out his life as Emperor of Germany, it would certainly have become a much kinder, gentler place with a 20th Century history of a totally different flavor. He was a "one-of-a-kind" for Germany and it is a shame that he and his ideas were so quickly stiffled. He is not known in Germany as "Friedrich der Gütige" (Frederick the Benevolent) for nothing. Just curious... Erich-Dieter Groebe

If you want, you can go ahead and create a section and enter these ideas yourself. Remember Be Bold. Prsgoddess187 14:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I personally believe that had Friedrich III's reign been 30 years longer, there may not be as big WWI and almost certainly Nazism would probably not take root in the first half of the 20th century. Any historians have done on this area of research? --JNZ 13:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The title "of Germany" may be commonly used, but it is blatantly wrong as it was intentionally not adopted. See Wilhelm_I,_German_Emperor#Kaiser. The numbering is related to the Kings of Prussia anyway. --Matthead 22:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

  • Support the proposed move to Friedrich III, German Emperor. Actually, I'd prefer Frederick III, German Emperor, but the poll does not include that question. Shilkanni 05:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak-ish support I support this format, but would optimally prefer to have "unique" cases of titling discussed as additions to the naming conventions. I agree with Shilkanni on the preference for Frederick though. Charles 05:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Prsgoddess187 11:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support, although I too would much prefer "Frederick". john k 11:12, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak support, as I prefer "Frederick III" instead of "Friedrich III". Olessi 13:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. disambiguating from the Holy Roman Emperors/kings of Germany is worth it. Septentrionalis
  • Support Noel S McFerran 02:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Voices above may also be relevant here.

  • Frederick. What he usually called in English. Septentrionalis 17:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support My choice of a forename. Charles 17:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Frederick is more commonly used, certainly. john k 17:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - as this is the "English" wiki, I say go with Frederick. Prsgoddess187 19:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Olessi 15:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Shilkanni 09:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC). Frederick is better than Friedrich.

[edit] Number

Voices above may also be relevant here.

  • I or none Only German Emperor called Frederick; he was Frederick III as King of Prussia. The naming conventions say that in this case we should follow present usage: Juan Carlos I, but Victoria; I'm not sure which is more common. Septentrionalis 17:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • III Seems to be a case of using the highest ordinal, as is the case with English/Scots/British monarchs. Charles 17:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • III It would seem that they followed the highest ordinal theory. I agree with Charles on this one. Prsgoddess187 19:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • III He is always called as "Frederick III." The fact that he was the only German Emperor called Frederick is completely irrelevant. Victor Emmanuel II was the first King of Italy called Victor Emmanuel. Edward VII was the first King of the United Kingdom called Edward. In both cases, numbering of monarchs didn't reset with the creation of a new kingdom, but followed from a predecessor kingdom - Sardinia in the case of Victor Emmanuel; England in that of Edward VII. The same is true for Frederick. The fact is that he is universally called "Frederick III," and not "Frederick I" or just "Frederick". Whether he is "Frederick III" as German Emperor or as King of Prussia seems somewhat irrelevant, if not a meaningless question. Ordinals aren't a matter of objective truth. They are a matter of what ordinal (if any) was actually used by the person in question, and what ordinal is used to refer to them by posterity. In neither case is the answer "Frederick" (without ordinal) or "Frederick I". john k 00:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • III - agree with John. Olessi 15:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • III or none. III is the only ordinal used of him in respectable sources. Any other ordinal seems just an artificial invention without enough support in real sources. If the ordinal is really so contested, it could be left out. Shilkanni 09:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Start a discussion at the naming conventions page if you feel strongly about this. Charles 23:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, that page seems to be busy with Polish monarchs, who would care for 3 Germans there?--Matthead 23:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
"Who would care for 3 Germans there?" -Perhaps the Polish editors :) Let's see... Shilkanni 05:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I started a section at the bottom of that page. See here. I feel the titling is similar enough to that of the Holy Roman Emperors that the German Emperors warrant explicit mention. Charles 05:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

There are three questions here: name, number, and title. I have added subsections for the first two, since they will be discussed, and they should be separated from the question of title, which is what is actually raised. Septentrionalis 17:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Result

Page moved to Frederick III, German Emperor. Eugène van der Pijll 21:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ==

Please add the following to this article:

[edit] In fiction


This entry is not a solicitation, but a sincere effort to highlight one of the few mentions of Friedrich Wilhelm (Friedrich III) in popular literature.

The story in question is one of the very few treatments of Friedrich III or KronPrinz Friedrich Wilhelm in fiction anywhere. In other articles books are cited (i.e. "Tecumseh in Fiction").

The site referred to is a commercial site, BUT this is not a commercial section of the site -- it's a creative section.

This seems dubious. Besides which, I'd imagine there've been a fair number of fictional portrayals. He appears in several episodes of the 70s BBC miniseries Fall of Eagles, for instance. The instance you highlight does not appear to be notable. john k 21:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 11:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)