Talk:Ernst Gideon von Laudon

Untitled
Tootzen (Livland) isn't certainly the Tootsi in Estonia. It needs to check the placenames in nowadays Latvia.

Exagerrattion
Although Laudon was a brave and worthy general, it is incorrect to attribute the victory at Kunersdorf to him. In the middle of the battle Loudon and Rumyantsev led allied cavalry charge and repulsed Prussian curassiers in the center, but the battle was far from over. The counterattack by Loudon and Rumyantsev occurred BEFORE the massive cavalry attack by the entire Prussian cavalry under von Seydlitz. Besides, overall command was Saltykov’s, and Austrians (other than cavalry) were mostly in reserve. I’ll look up the references.Vitoldus44 18:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Loudon as Suvorov's teacher
This needs a source.

Later Career
According to Johann Pezzl's "Loudon's Lebensgeschichte" (1791), E.G. von Laudon did not have sons. Pezzl says that Laudon's brother's son, Baron Alexander Laudon was the heir, but not effective until Laudon's wife's death. I have a contemporary (1798) swedish translation of Pezzls book. I am not familiar with the more modern literature on Laudon, but the information of Laudon's son is very confusing. I leave the main article unaltered for the time being. S.T.T. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.239.167.85 (talk) 18:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Adding to the previous: Possible source for this confusion is another of E.G. von Laudon's brother's sons, Gideon Ernst von Laudon. (note the order of the personal names) Gideon Ernst died during the Siege of Belgrade 1789. Gideon Ernst was E.G. von Laudons first choice to become his heir but the death rectified it. S.T.T.84.239.167.85 19:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Requested move
moved per comments about German peerage below. Hopefully Laudon works. --rgpk (comment) 18:00, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Baron Ernst Gideon von Laudon → Ernst Gideon von Laudon — The article text of Baron Ernst Gideon von Laudon refers to the translation "Baron" as being a title relating to the subject's nobility in Europe. We don't generally use titles of European nobility in article names, per Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). —  Jeff G. ツ  12:48, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Oppose There is absolutely nothing in that naming convention which says anything like "We don't generally use titles of European nobility in article names". If there is a reason to change this article title, some other one has to be cited. Noel S McFerran (talk) 05:40, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) says "1.Treat other European nobility like British nobility above, adopting for local circumstances", the section above (WP:NCPEER) says "Members of the British Peerage, whether hereditary peers or life peers, usually have their articles titled "Personal name, Ordinal (if appropriate) Peerage title", e.g. Alun Gwynne Jones, Baron Chalfont; Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington; Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston", and British Peerage includes Baron.  We don't have a peerage title per se in this case, so I would drop the peerage title forming Ernst Gideon von Laudon.    —  Jeff G.  ツ  04:39, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Support, we don't need the "Baron" for any reason (it doesn't seem to be inseparably attached to his name, and we don't usually include titles before the name unless they help resolve ambiguity), but does anyone know whether it's "Ernst Gideon" or "Gideon Ernst"? German Wikipedia has the latter, and sources differ.--Kotniski (talk) 22:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Support move. My feeling would also be that we should spell it "Loudon," not "Laudon".  As far as the naming conventions, the basic issue is that we have no conventions for German nobility, except the very bad one Jeff G. quotes above, which means nothing.  Using the basic British rules for French or Spanish nobility makes sense, because the French and Spanish nobility had titles analogous to British ones and that are treated that way in reliable sources.  It makes little sense for German nobility, where titles are much more prevalent much less used in reliable sources, and much less necessary for identifying people.  The Duke of Medina Sidonia, say, or the Marquis of Lafayette, are unidentifiable without their noble titles, because the title isn't otherwise part of their name.  This is not the case for German nobility where, pretty much universally, the title is basically their surname. john k (talk) 17:03, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Why do you prefer the spelling "Loudon"? And any ideas whether it should be "Ernst Gideon" or "Gideon Ernst" (or how it came about that both orderings are in use)?--Kotniski (talk) 20:24, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Apparently this is another emigrant Scottish family; Loudon would be the form before translation into Swedish and German. Since he is also called Simon Gideon Laudon and Gideon Loudon, simple Gideon may be the best forename in the title. For what it is worth, we don't spell the Swedish Macleans or the Norwegian Greig as they are spelt in Scotland. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)