Talk:William IV (disambiguation)

William IV of the United Kingdom appears to be the only king on this list, should he be the primary meaning? PatGallacher (talk) 12:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

William IV, Prince of Orange, who was hereditary stadtholder of the United Provinces of the Netherlands, and William IV, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, were both hereditary rulers of an independent country; in other words they were kings in all but name. — Tonymec (talk) 06:39, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

He is by far the primary on page views - over 11,000, with only one other getting 1000. Boleyn2 (talk) 17:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 4 July 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The result of the move request was: Withdrawn - will discuss at RfD. Interstellarity (talk) 12:01, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

---

• William IV → William IV (disambiguation)
• Henry V → Henry V (disambiguation)
• Henry VII → Henry VII (disambiguation)
• William III → William III (disambiguation)
• Henry VI → Henry VI (disambiguation)

– I am not sure these are the best moves, but I would like to get a consensus on whether the English/British monarchs are the primary topic for those titles. See other discussion here. Pinging @Certes: for his input. Interstellarity (talk) 01:47, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Keep. All of these pages point not only to British kings but also to Holy Roman Emperors, stadtholders or kings of the Netherlands, etc. I feel that this move (followed by the assumed move of the respective "British king" pages to the "default" pages) would increase the risk of having wikilinks pointing to the wrong page. (IOW: IMO a link to "Henry VI" meaning Henry VI of England, falling on a disambiguation page is acceptable; a link to "Henry VI" meaning the Holy Roman Emperor falling on the English king is not.) — Tonymec (talk) 06:52, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Oppose (keep). I fear that my comments here may have been misunderstood. "William IV" is clearly ambiguous and probably has no primary topic, and similarly for the other titles. What I do suggest is to maintain the status quo where King William IV redirects to William IV of the United Kingdom, rather than to the dab William IV, because "King William IV" refers unambiguously to the only king with that title: the other dab entries refer to dukes, counts, etc. Although it may be a matter for RfD rather than RM, we should also consider restoring the status quo ante on the other redirects which have recently changed:

• King Henry V to Henry V of England rather than dab Henry V
• King Henry VII to Henry VII of England rather than dab Henry VII
• King Henry VI to Henry VI of England rather than dab Henry VI
• King William III to William III of England rather than dab William III

Those cases are less clear cut, because other kings of those names exist. Certes (talk) 07:32, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. No evidence of primary topic. DrKay (talk) 08:32, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

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.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:William IV of the United Kingdom which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:16, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Elizabeth II which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:46, 30 July 2023 (UTC)