Talk:Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich of Russia

Old talk
Why should this be at "Konstantin"? He is best known as "Constantine", as are all other grand dukes with this name. john k 17:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Article title
Google Books shows the standard form in English scholarship to be "Konstantin Nikolaevich" (68 hits with "grand duke"), as opposed to 37 hits for "Constantine Nikolayevich", 34 hits for "Konstantin Nikolayevich" (with "grand duke"), 1 hit for "Constantine Nicholaievich" (the latest change), and no hits for ""Konstantine Nicholaievich". "Konstantin Nikolaevich" is also the form used by the Library of Congress. Please do some research before suggesting (or making) name-changes. Noel S McFerran 19:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Requested move
no consensus. --  tariq abjotu  20:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Grand Duke Constantine Nicholaievich of Russia → Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich of Russia — The current name only has one single hit on Google Books as opposed to at least 68 hits for the proposed name which is also used by the Library of Congress. See above for more statistics on other forms. —Noel S McFerran 19:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.


 * Support as proposer. Noel S McFerran 19:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Not yet. "Constantine" is quite commonly used, and what I am familiar with. Let's see links to those Google Books results. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * But if we use "Constantine", we should use "Nikolayevich". Pedantry in one name is silly. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Almost anything is better than the "Konstantine Nicholaievich" to which Miguelemejia changed it; that form of the name has not one single hit in Google Books. Noel S McFerran 01:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Miguelemejia (talk,8 September 2007
 * Support. Move should not have occurred while survey is in progress, prejudicing action by consensus. Also, grounds cited for move irrelevant to Naming Conventions & relevant scholarship. Lethiere 01:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich of Russia, I think is the best choice.
 * Oppose but support Constantine Nikolayevich. —  AjaxSmack   10:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose There was a discussion on Russian naming as a whole and it ought to be investigated further. Charles 18:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Data

 * "Konstantin Nikolaevich" and "grand duke" 68 hits; if you don't limit by "grand duke" you get 852 hits, but no doubt that includes people other than the grand duke
 * "Constantine Nikolayevich" 37 hits
 * "Konstantin Nikolayevich" and "grand duke" 34 hits; if you don't limit by "grand duke" you get 149 hits
 * "Constantine Nicholaievich" 1 hit
 * "Konstantine Nicholaievich" no hits
 * "Constantine" certainly WAS more common in English scholarship for this grand duke; it was used in his 1892 obituaries in both The Times and The New York Times. But things have changed in the last 115 years. "Konstantin Nikolaevich" is used by the Library of Congress. Noel S McFerran 22:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The Library of Congress is notoriously hypercorrect in spelling; I believe they use -iy for the common termination. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The Britannica uses Constantine both for this prince and for his uncle; this link is to the article on Nicholas I.
 * The Columbia has an article Constantine Nikolayevich.
 * Encarta appears to use Constantine also; it certainly does for his uncle, the Decembrist pretender. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
I wrote the article about Konstantine Nikolaievich from start to finish and I used an extensive use of different sources to write it. The use of names is rather arbitrary for royalty; the closer English version to their original names is always preferred. The names of the Romanovs who were Russian by birth were first written in Russian, second in French, which was widely used in court ands society until the late nineteenth century, then in English an so for. The versions of the names used in different source vary greatly. The version generally used now is Konstantine. However, some books have opted for Constantine.

In any case, either Constantine or Konstatine the use of translated names is arbitrary. I do not have interest in any controversy in this matter. If I chose Konstatine over Constantine was solely because it was the English version of his name that most closely resembles the Russian form of the name. It is also the one who has gained more acceptance in recent years in the English-speaking world when referring to not only Grand Duke Konstantine Nikolaievich, but also to his son, the well-known writer Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich of Russia. He used the pen name KK from his initials. Konstantine has taken more acceptance in recent authors including biographers and Romanov’s scholars Greg King and Penny Marshall. In their book, Gilded Prism from which great deal of information for this article was taken, they used Konstantine.

[Franky Furbo] While not depreciating the author's effort, the "sources" he is using are either sometimes wrong or there are misquotations. I especially like the fragment about "turmoil and martial law" in Poland in 1861 when the liberal and freedom-loving Konstantin Nikolaevich came to Poland and how he well-liked his Polish subjects. For the author's benefit, I would like to clarify just one thing: This was the time just before January Uprosing in Poland, a 4-year war to overthrow Russian burden, triggered by imposing martial law and attempt to quelch Polish freedom movement by extraordinary mandatory conscription of some ten thousand of sons of nobility (as ordinary soldiers, of course, to serve 25 years as privates in some obscure Siberian garrison or fighting the Turkmen and Chcechen in the mountains, at best). The Uprising was mainly caused by the fact that the "liberal" ruler of Russia cannot understand that the law announced today in St Petersburg will not be in force and will not be obeyed in Warsaw the PREVIOUS day. So does not our liberal Uncle Konstantin. You should not look further that for a thread "Polish-Russian Wars" and article "January Uprosing" on the very same Wikipedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.49.238.90 (talk) 15:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Miguelemejia  3 September 2007
 * Miguelemejia moved this page after I initiated a requested move. He has moved the page to a name which has not one single hit in Google Books.  The name I have suggested "Konstantin Nikolaevich" is actually closer to the Russian - but more importantly, it is what is used most frequently in English. Noel S McFerran 02:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

The problem with "Konstantin Nikolaevich" is that is a general form. Nikolaievich is a patronymic no really a last name. There are too many Konstantine Nikolaievich. Konstantine is a very common Russian name and so is the patronymic Nikolaievich. Miguelemejia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miguelemejia (talk • contribs) 02:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage.)&#32;Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Romanov_Autumn/c9toAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moneytrees🏝️Talk🌴Help out at CCI! 05:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)