Talk:Ernst August von Hannover (born 1954)/Archive 3

Requested move 19 July 2021

 * 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: !Votes are split almost evenly and I don't see that either side has made a much stronger case than the other in terms of policies or guidelines, so no consensus is the only possible close. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:23, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Prince Ernst August of Hanover (born 1954) → Ernst August, Prince of Hanover (born 1954) – He is not just a prince of Hanover, he is the Prince. The name should reflect that. Векочел (talk) 04:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Support as per nom and requested title is good to be moved.Fade258 (talk) 05:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Also because it is better to have the subject’s name lead the title.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. All the accessible English-language sources given in the article call him 'Prince Ernst August of Hanover' or 'Prince Ernst of Hanover', including the official website of the Monegasque monarchy. He is only a prince by courtesy. Hanover is not actually a principality. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:38, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * But it was a kingdom in the past, and he is the head of the royal House of Hanover. There was a British prince named Prince William, Duke of Gloucester, but I believe Duke of Gloucester was only a courtesy title and he was never formally created a duke, but the article name has not changed. This is also in line with Louis Ferdinand, Prince of Prussia and others. Векочел (talk) 21:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It was a kingdom 150 years ago...we have no obligation to standardize the format of defunct courtesy titles as if they were still recognized, especially when they aren't used in sources. JoelleJay (talk) 17:05, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Celia. He has no legal title that would support giving him a more formalized name. JoelleJay (talk) 18:23, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support because his legal wife's page is "Caroline, Princess of Hanover" and most of the titled people on wikipedia are styled thus: name, followed by title. His children are "Prince X of Hanover" (like Prince George of Cambridge) but he should be Name, then title. Even if the title is not constitutional, this is how the encyclopedia categorizes him. Otherwise, call him Ernst Hanover. But if you use the title, it should be in the traditional encyclopedic style.--Geekyroyalaficionado (talk) 23:33, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. There is a difference in German royal families. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:04, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Celia. Follow the sources. I've still to see any evidence that it is a substantive title: all the cadets of the House of Welf carry the title Prinz von Hannover: see the official site (published by 'Heinrich Prinz von Hannover'). DrKay (talk) 15:27, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support: he is the head of the House of Hanover. Jonathunder (talk) 16:35, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Which is different from "Prince of Hanover", a title that hasn't been legally valid in 150 years and has been illegal to use in Germany since 1918... JoelleJay (talk) 17:07, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If it was illegal, then Ernest Augustus would surely not be using the title. But he is the Prince of Hanover. Векочел (talk) 08:06, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , he doesn't personally use that title in Germany; the gossip media does. There's also the common issue of editors translating German sources (which may include the title as part of the name) as if it was being used as a title. E.g. editors translating "Michael Prinz von Baden", where "Prinz von Baden" is the person's legal last name, as "Michael, Prince of Baden". JoelleJay (talk) 18:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) and to bring the article title in line with that of his father and wife Caroline, Princess of Hanover. - dwc lr (talk) 19:12, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , his father's article title is Prince Ernest Augustus of Hanover (born 1914). -- GoodDay (talk) 16:04, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose - unless Hanover has regained independence & has chosen to become a principality, with Ernest as its reigning prince. GoodDay (talk) 00:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * May be an idea to look into the bios of others of defunct royal families. Like the former German imperial/Prussian royal family, for example. GoodDay (talk) 00:28, 22 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose: Hanover is not a principality.  Peter Ormond &#128172;  07:36, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If Hanover is not a principality, then Ernst is not a prince. The proposed is just as bad as the status quo. Should the title be changed to Ernst August, (born 1954)? A more accurate Ernst August, pretender of Hanover (born 1954) feels too provocative. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:04, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , how to refer to holders of defunct (often illegal) titles has been an issue for a long time. The argument for calling him a "prince" rests entirely on COMMONNAME, and since the types of publications that report on formerly-noble family minutiae are exactly the types to propagate fictional titles and styles, we're left with those being part of the referent in a majority of RS for such subjects. JoelleJay (talk) 18:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * User:JoelleJay, I am aware of the old persisting problems with NCROY. I particularly find incongruous  things like  Elizabeth II not being allowed to be Queen Elizabeth II, and numerous other historical regnants with poor recognisability, while arguably "incorrect" cases like this are "allowed".
 * On the other hand, I cannot find good sources for "Prince of Hanover" being "illegal".  As you say, so many quality sources call him "Prince Ernest August", with only a few running text cases of "Ernst August Sr", contrasting with his son "Ernst August Jr".  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , you're right, I forgot Germany didn't criminalize use of titles like Austria did. I should have said "Prince of Hanover" is "not legal", as in not legally protected or recognized. JoelleJay (talk) 23:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Two questions. Who says he is the prince of Hanover (i.e. a Fürst rather than a Prinz)? And who says that the Name, Title of Place format indicates being the prince? Surtsicna (talk) 01:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * This might not be universal but I believe I am in correct in saying that the titleholder usually has their title follow the name, as in the articles on the Princes of Monaco with whom the Hanovers intermarried. You hear in the news about Prince George, not George, Prince of Cambridge. Векочел (talk) 14:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, but that does not answer either of my questions. Surtsicna (talk) 10:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Monaco describe his wife as HRH The Princess of Hanover. With royalty there’s various ways they could be described and it’s pretty standard styling using the format ‘Name, Title of Place’ to differentiate a head of a House or reigning Prince from the rest of the family. I’ve no doubt his brother in law gets called in sources Prince Albert II of Monaco, The Prince of Monaco or just Prince Albert. Prinz doesn’t necessarily mean you can’t be “The Prince” likewise Fürst doesn’t necessarily mean you are “The Prince”, eg the Fürsts von Urach or Teck or Wrede. Wikipedia is rather tabloid like and it’s not like a reference work like a Burke’s Peerage, Almanach de Gotha etc (which use “Name, Title of Place”) so editors may prefer the less correct format over the more formal correct format. But in the grand scheme of things whether it’s Prince Ernst August of Hanover or Ernst August, Prince of Hanover is a small issue. - dwc lr (talk) 15:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Burke's and AdG both rely on submissions from contemporary aristocratic families updating the information on their pedigrees, and AdG at least is hardly an independent source for many reigning and formerly-noble families whose members sit on its board; while they're not quite user-generated sources, they certainly shouldn't be considered on-par with real tertiary reference books. JoelleJay (talk) 17:19, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Independence is important, but on an entirely different angle, for BLPs, consideration of the wishes of the subject on their own name is for taking into account, and the evidence of their wishes comes from non-independent sources, obviously. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Another question. Why is he & his son's name, Ernst & not Ern e st, like their ancestors? I'm guessing, this has to do with the english language world's compassion (since the late-20th century) to 'respect' the foreign language of said area. Like why we don't have Margaret II of Denmark, John Charles I of Spain, Philip VI of Spain & as well as Paul, Crown Prince of Greece, Victor Emmanuel, Crown Prince of Italy etc etc. Guess, I kinda answered my own question. -- GoodDay (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm no expert on this but I can tell you the English language is hardly consistent in its spelling. Why is it that colonel and kernel are pronounced the same way? I'm guessing this is just something that arose in the past 50 years or so. Векочел (talk) 14:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. As argued by Celia Homeford and others, it is a courtesy title, not a substantive title; it should follow WP:NCROY, not WP:NCROY. Adumbrativus (talk) 09:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Monaco disagrees and describes his wife for example, who by the way we use the format Caroline, Princess of Hanover as HRH The Princess of Hanover. - dwc lr (talk) 15:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Consistency is important. If this page title is not changed, I recommend changing Caroline's page. If there is no Prince of Hanover, why is there a Princess of Hanover? lmao --Geekyroyalaficionado (talk) 21:17, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * In the eyes of royals, former royals are still royals. GoodDay (talk) 22:17, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Why do so many of you like to change the argument? The question is not whether he is royal. The question is about the NAME OF HIS PAGE, that is the name of the article. Whether he is Ernst August, Prince of Hanover (like Caroline, Princess of Hanover) or "Prince Ernst August of Hanover," is not a question of whether or not he is royal, past or present, in this universe, or in another galaxy. Stick to the question at hand, please. Or don't. By the way, I'd like to change my vote to OPPOSE. Leave it the way it is.--Geekyroyalaficionado (talk) 16:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I like the change because I think it better for the most important words to be the first words in the title. His name, Ernst August.  Being a prince, raw or "of Hanover" is less important to the subject that his name.  There are lots of Princes of Hanover.  Admittedly, there are lots of people, in his line, named Ernst August. My preference is not strong, NCROY is a mess, and the answer is not obvious. SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:15, 1 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Support per Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) + in line what is totally customary . Per tradition (after the abolition of the German monarchies, especially the last 50 years), heads of former royal German houses are styled with a dumbed-down title out of courtesy, e.g. “The King of X” → “The Prince/Duke of X”. Legally it is part of their surname, internationally it is regarded as a courtesy title with structurally treated as a substantive title. For example: the current head of the Prussian House (with former Prussian kings and German emperors) is "The Prince of Prussia", i.e. thus named at Wikipedia as Georg Friedrich, Prince of Prussia (not "Prince Georg Friedrich of Prussia"); the head of the House of Wittelsbach (with former Kings of Bavaria) is styled as "The Duke of Bavaria", i.e. named at Wikipedia as Franz, Duke of Bavaria (not "Duke Franz of Bavaria"), head of the Grand Ducal House of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach is styled as "The Prince of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach", i.e. at Wikipedia as Michael, Prince of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach (not "Prince Michael of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach"); and the current head of the House of Hohenzollern is "The Prince of Hohenzollern", thus at Wikipedia as Karl Friedrich, Prince of Hohenzollern (and thus not "Prince Karl Friedrich of Hohenzollern"), etc. etc., see many other examples: Heads of former ruling families (Germany). Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 12:43, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Retrial?
The article says:


 * In 2004, he was convicted of aggravated assault and causing grievous bodily harm after supposedly beating a German man, Joe Brunnlehner, with a knuckleduster on the Kenyan island of Lamu. He has demanded a retrial for the case on the basis of false evidence. His lawyers have publicly stated that he has never owned a knuckleduster nor held one in his hand.

The article discussing how Ernst August demanded a retrial was published in 2008, which is 14 years ago. I would think that the court would have decided by now if he was going to be allowed a retrial. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 19:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 222601.jpg.webp