Talk:Henry VIII

What to call Monarchs--i.e. article title format

I'm assuming that monarchs will be referred with the country in the title, that is Henry IV of England as opposed to Henry IV, which would need disambiguation (is that really a word?). I'll go ahead and use that format and fix the links I find, unless someone has an objection. Aleta Curry 22:04, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

I think we eventually agreed to name these all Henry VIII (England), etc. J. Noel Chiappa 14:03, 11 April 2008 (CDT)

No we agreed only when it was necessary. There is only one Henry VIII and so the England part is superfluous. Richard Jensen 14:30, 11 April 2008 (CDT)

I'm all for picking something clear as far as the names of royalty are concerned, but I also think it would be desirable to figure out a naming scheme that avoids anachronism. For example, even though he was technically king of England, it would be strange to name our article on the Angevin king Henry II "Henry II (England)" because at his accession, most of his territory was in modern-day France. Perhaps it would be preferable to go with royal household instead-- i.e. Henry VIII (house of Tudor). This is far from a perfect solution-- it's somewhat patriarchal-- but it is clear and un-anachronistic. Rather than engaging Richard on his particular question-- naming each article by realm or family or whatever from the start or not-- I am going to refrain until Anthony gets the 'Naming Convention' proposal written up and we have our vote (I am guessing that it will break down along deterministic v. non-deterministic lines). Brian P. Long 15:34, 11 April 2008 (CDT)

is there any opposition to renaming this Henry VIII ? That is what the draft on naming conventions calls for. Richard Jensen 08:49, 17 May 2008 (CDT)

Henry VIII is fine. What is the situation when we have multiple Henrys? In that situation, How do we work it out? (There were several kings of france called Henry, I think) Denis Cavanagh 11:03, 17 May 2008 (CDT)