Talk:Moritz, Landgrave of Hesse

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Mid-importance).

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Various

Moritz Friedrich Karl Emanuel Humbert Landgraf von Hessen-Kassel1 (M) b. 6 August 1926, Moritz Friedrich Karl Emanuel Humbert Landgraf von Hessen-Kassel was born on 6 August 1926 in Racconigi, Italy.1 He is the son of Philipp Landgraf von Hessen-Kassel and Mafalda Maria Elisabetta Anna Romana di Savoia-Carignano, Principessa di Savoia.1 He married Tatiana Louise Ursula Therese Elsa Prinzessin zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg, daughter of Gustav Albrecht Fürst zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg and Margareta Fouché d'Otrante, on 1 June 1964 in a civil marriage. They were remarried 2 days later in a religious ceremony.1 He and Tatiana Louise Ursula Therese Elsa Prinzessin zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg were divorced on 16 October 1974 in Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. Moritz Friedrich Karl Emanuel Humbert Landgraf von Hessen-Kassel gained the title of Prinz von Hessen-Kassel.1 He gained the title of Landgraf von Hessen-Kassel on 25 October 1980.1

Children of Moritz Friedrich Karl Emanuel Humbert Landgraf von Hessen-Kassel and Tatiana Louise Ursula Therese Elsa Prinzessin zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg Mafalda Margarethe Prinzessin von Hessen-Kassel+ b. 6 Jul 1965 Heinrich Donatus Philipp Umberto Prinz von Hessen-Kassel b. 17 Oct 1966 Elena Elisabeth Madeleine Prinzessin von Hessen-Kassel b. 8 Nov 1967 Philipp Robin Prinz von Hessen-Kassel b. 10 Sep 1970 Citations

Trivia regarding two of his descendants

According to [[1]], he is the closest common ancestor of American actresses Brooke Shields and Catherine Oxenberg (11th cousins).RicJac 18:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Making up names of modern persons vs. legal spellings

I firmly believe, and would like to assert strongly, with all due respect, that it is inappropriate to use exonyms for the personal names of modern people, especially living persons, on English Wikipedia. The year 1900 is an appropriate cut-off as a rule. 20th and 21st century people (as compared to historical persons of old) have legal names which have been and are spelled only one way legally. King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden is one of thousands of examples of this, and the fact that Mae West is not called Maj Väst on Swedish WP is another. Thus any other variations of these persons' names, which they themselves did/do not use as pseudonyms or professional names, would be the inventions of people unauthorized, legally, to name them. I am removing the prince's Italian and English name versions as irrelevant. SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not spam

It is not spam to mention the names of all 3 persons in the caption under an image with only 3 persons, and it is not helpful to just remove an identity so that it's no longer clear who's who. Reverting. Also see Also please see Talk:Indian Love Call#Image of a duo singing the song replaced by movie poster. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:NOTPROMOTION and discuss here User_talk:SergeWoodzing#Emil_Eikner if needs be. Domdeparis (talk) 06:38, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop referring to my talk page, which I have asked you to stay away from with these spam accusations! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:43, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image removed

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. A reviewer felt that this edit would not improve the article.

Please reinstate this valuable image which was removed for no apparent reason. The only modern day free images of this recently deceased man were taken on this same day and are in the Commons collection that this one comes from. It is my objective opinion that rare historical photos like this one are relevant to articles about notable people, no matter what the names are of other individuals in them. As free images, these are few and far between. This one was specifically OK'd here. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 08:23, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it among other other photas in other articles added by a person (SW writing above) with coi to the photo and a person in it. I can not see the importance of this photo here, while the article already has a good photo of the subject. Nice private photo but not encyclopedic. I let to others to look and hope sw will do so too. Adville (talk) 09:05, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done in accordance with similar requests. DrStrauss talk 08:51, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 March 2020

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: No consensus to move b uidhe 05:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moritz, Landgrave of Hesse → Moritz von Hessen – The current article title gives the impression that his title is Landgrave of Hesse. In fact, like all German nobility, the Landgravate was abolished a century ago. His surname is "Prinz und Landgraf von Hessen", just like it is for everyone in his family, but this is not a title and it shouldn't be treated as such or translated into English. It's just a last name. German Wikipedia simply calls him "Moritz von Hessen", and it makes sense to follow their lead. Smurrayinchester 10:00, 8 March 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. — Amakuru (talk) 18:19, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would be OK with Moritz Prinz und Landgraf von Hessen, but not the shortened version. If we are to use the German language for the article's name here on English Wikipedia, only the full version of his surname is acceptable, not just a translation to German (!) of Moritz of Hesse. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support The nominator's reasoning is spot on. To be even more explicit: given that it's a surname, it's inappropriate to translate it. As to whether we use the German article name (which happens to be "Moritz von Hessen", so I'm not sure what SergeWoodzing is trying to say) or his full name, that should be decided by what the common name is. I'm not sure whether the German Wikipedia follows the same common name rules as the English Wikipedia. But if we assume that the German article name is representative of the common name, then by default we should adopt it, unless somebody else can supply evidence that the common name in English is different. Either option is a definite improvement over the current article name. Schwede 66 00:17, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moritz von Hessen translates to English as Moritz of Hesse, and in that original German version only part of his surname is included. That's what I was trying to say. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. These titles are still used and he is still Landgrave of Hesse, whatever the German government says. Per WP:COMMONNAME that's what we should also use. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Patently incorrect re: what "he is" (btw he's dead). Governments decide over the validity of titles of regional or national significance within their own contries, not Wikipedians, neither regular ones nor administrators. I've seen no evidence either that the current articlde name adheres to WP:COMMONNAME, which I agree we shouold use if substantiated in this case. Does it? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know he's dead. I didn't mean he is still Landgrave of Hesse in that way. Governments do not decide common name usage. Are you saying that he is not commonly referred to as the Landgrave of Hesse? Because most other German aristocrats (and aristocrats in other European republics) are certainly still commonly referred to using their titles, whatever the government says their official name is. Here's his obituary in The Times, for instance. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who said governments decide common name usage? I certainly didn't. Governments register & decide the legal names of their residents.

People often refer to members of former royal families by what would have been their titles had they not been former. It's merely a courtesy but is not valid in any other way. German royalty is extinct now, because nobody who was royal before 1918 is still alive (that I know of).

I have no objection to common name being applied here or anywhere, because that's Wikipedia.

But I would still prefer that his given name of address and his full legally registered surname were used i.e. Moritz Prinz und Landgraf von Hessen. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The question here seems to be, do we go with long established Wikipedia policy, or with personal opinions? If the policy no longer has consensus support then change it. Otherwise, follow it. Andrewa (talk)
Comment My input has mainly been to oppose changing the article's name to the proposed German version where only part of his surname is in there, sort of like Ronald Donald for Ronald McDonald. Other than that (though I prefer their legal names for everyone), I'm neutral. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not neutral, and I can't see any way in which this comment relates to the issue I raised. Or am I misunderstanding your stringing? Andrewa (talk) 22:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't fix it now, but my above comment made a bit more sense before it and the comment to which it replied were both modified. Not a big problem, but see here for the original if interested, and please all note the talk page guidelines. Andrewa (talk) 16:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge that my changing my remarks under your comment to a comment not under it may cause confusion, and I apologize. I did not mean to comment on the issue you raised and my remarks were intitially located incorrectly. At the moment I changed that, my patience with ~~striking stuff~~ and underlining stuff was minimal. Sorry! I usually do such things more carefully & clearly. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:15, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There is a similar discussion at Talk:Donatus, Landgrave of Hesse#Requested move 8 March 2020, and as I say there, the two might be better discussed as a single multi-move. And I imagine there are many more similar. Andrewa (talk) 22:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

" Oppose given that the Talk:Donatus, Landgrave of Hesse#Requested move 8 March 2020 decision was no consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:301:4360:39D8:DC61:7CF6:6844 (talk) 05:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Just to expand my !vote above, current article naming policy is to go with what English speakers use. There are some exceptions, and particularly relevant in this case is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility), but that doesn't cover this case at all well, or am I missing it?

Several rationales above suggest that we should follow current German legislation rather than common use. That can work, and if adopted by consensus should be added to the guideline (or at least clarified there), and otherwise these personal opinions have no relevance here whatsoever.

I believe personal opinions on article talk pages always are relevant as long as their obvious intent is to improve the article. We have no guideline that even suggests that such (such) personal opinions are not allowed. If consensus on the talk pages clearly goes with any such personal opinion that's what will happen to the article. Being forbidden to utter it would then hardly be constructive. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:15, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above there's a very similar proposal at Talk:Donatus, Landgrave of Hesse#Requested move 8 March 2020. I suggest the issues raised be discussed here for the moment. Andrewa (talk) 16:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as not moved. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:29, 8 April 2020 (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.