Jump to content

Talk:Eric XIV of Sweden

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

Intro has holes

[edit]

The guy conquered Estonia, was insane and got arsenic in his pie soup. Is that all? The intro have holes in it. He did something political, leading to the Sture murders and a general alienation of the Swedish nobility, deciding to replace him with his brother John III. Then he was imprisoned and died from poisonous pie soup. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 08:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eric XIV of Sweden. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:10, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Daughters

[edit]

If he had four daughters, why are only three listed? Looks like a mistake to me. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deposed 1569

[edit]

John had Eric arrested and jailed in September 1568, but according to all reliable sources Eric was not formally deposed by the Riksdag until January 1569. John did not have the power to depose his brother on his own. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:58, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article's section on this cites 2 reliable sources FFS. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:26, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have an exact date? GoodDay (talk) 22:58, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, unfortunately we do not. Castle burned down 1697. Much info was lost. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:31, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
January 25, according to 1911 EB [1]. January 26, according to Katarina Harrison Lindbergh, Erik XIV. Don't blame the fire every time some detail is not the account you have read.
Andejons (talk) 12:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So, will you add that (25 or 26 January) and those sources?
Good idea to suspect (not blame) the castle fire since so much info was lost, according to academic sources. I will continue to do so whenever I please and take orders from nobody about that.
Several academic biographies have no date. One can suspect that's intentional. -SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:34, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 September 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. Concensus suggests retaining the '[Name] [ordinals] of [Country]' article naming scheme. (non-admin closure) A y d o h 8 ( t a l k ) 02:05, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– These titles are WP:CONCISE and WP:PRECISE. Векочел (talk) 01:20, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WP:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility has been informed of this discussion. Векочел (talk) 22:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:NCROY, which is supported by the policy of WP:CONSISTENT. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:CONCISE, WP:PRECISE, and WP:COMMONNAME, which are policy and thus trump WP:NCROY. Also, WP:NCROY itself mentions the examples Juan Carlos I and Edward VIII as valid. Surtsicna (talk) 07:37, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is misleading. It does not mention "Juan Carlos I" and "Edward VIII" as valid for being more concise or precise, but fore different reasons. The former by saying that Where there has only been one holder of a specific monarchical name in a state, the ordinal is used only when it was in official use, as with Juan Carlos I (not Juan Carlos, King of Spain) and the latter by saying that former or deposed monarchs should be known by the regnal style eg. Edward VIII not Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor.
Nowhere does it say that these cannot be "Juan Carlos I of Spain" or "Edward VIII of the United Kingdom". And both of those titles have been used at one point or another. estar8806 (talk) ★ 20:18, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose per Estar8806. NCROY really should be the governing authority on this, not the impossibly broad COMMONNAME (I'm also doubtful that these "new" titles are the common name; in context "Charles" is the common name for Charles XI, but that doesn't make that title suitable either). Tim O'Doherty (talk) 14:58, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A guideline cannot overrule a policy nor does NCROY attempt to overrule it. In fact, it even says: Sometimes the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, and can be used without any qualifier, as in Marie Antoinette. "Charles" is not suitable because it is ambiguous, which COMMONNAME takes into consideration. Surtsicna (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
COMMONNAME also takes CONSISTENT into consideration, as it explicitly states Editors should also consider all five of the criteria for article titles outlined above, which includes CONSISTENT. estar8806 (talk) ★ 20:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am all for the titles of these articles becoming consistent with the titles of the articles about other unambiguously named Swedish monarchs, e.g. Carl XVI Gustaf and Gustaf VI Adolf. Go consistency! Surtsicna (talk) 21:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"NCROY really should be the governing authority" and "that doesn't make that title suitable" address your counterarguments. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:05, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, should-bes, could-bes, and I-do-not-like-its are the most welcome responses to my arguments. Surtsicna (talk) 21:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Happy days then. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:03, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Surtsicna. Killuminator (talk) 16:41, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose then Elizabeth II should be moved back to Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Louis XIII to Louis XIII of France, Hassanal Bolkiah to Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei, etc. Векочел (talk) 20:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"I suppose then Elizabeth II should be moved back to Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom" Yes, the current title is ridiculous. Dimadick (talk) 20:26, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There was recently a RM that decided against moving, so it's not likely to happen any time soon. 2601:249:9301:D570:B94E:1CC3:BC5:A0E (talk) 04:04, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely, yeah. Egsan Bacon (talk) 20:31, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please have a look at Category:16th-century Swedish monarchs and Category:17th-century Swedish monarchs and tell me what consistency we are supposed to maintain. They include articles such as Sigismund III Vasa, Christina, Queen of Sweden, and Gustavus Adolphus. Surtsicna (talk) 19:55, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, "Christina, Queen of Sweden" is well within the guidelines of NCROY and hence consistency. Gustavus Adolphus is an example of point 2 of NCROY (COMMONNAME), while Sigismund III Vasa was more notable as king of Poland, and none of the Polish monarchs use "Name # of Poland", because there was various styles for their kings as they were elected. Every single other title in both of those categories uses some form of "Monarch # of Country". estar8806 (talk) ★ 20:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And is Charles XII not a COMMONNAME, in addition to being precise (there are no other monarchs with this name and number)? The article on the current Swedish king is located at Carl XVI Gustaf, no of Sweden involved. Ditto with the Spanish king Felipe VI. Векочел (talk) 20:23, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, all of the titles proposed here fit point 2 of NCROY (COMMONNAME) as much as Gustavus Adolphus does. Surtsicna (talk) 20:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Except they don't. That is very clearly for monarchs whose regnal name and number are completely different from their commonname. Try reading it. Nowhere does it mention Elizabeth II or any other monarch with an unambiguous regnal name and number. It simply mentions names like Gustavus Adolphus, Mary, Queen of Scots and William the Conqueror. estar8806 (talk) ★ 20:36, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You try not reading into it. It literally only says If there is an overwhelmingly common name, use it. Then it references WP:COMMONNAME. These are overwhelmingly common names. It further says Sometimes the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, and can be used without any qualifier, as in Marie Antoinette. These are unambiguous and primary usage and do not require any qualifier. One really needs to bend over backwards to read these differently. Surtsicna (talk) 06:58, 5 September 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eric_XIV_of_Sweden&oldid=1194938422"