Talk:Gustavus Adolphus/Archive 3

So he was known as Gustavus Adolphus Magnus?
In the introduction to the article it is stated that he "...was widely known in English by his Latinized name Gustavus Adolphus Magnus..."

Since the title Magnus (meaning the great) was given him two years after his death, he couldn't have been known to his contemporaries as Magnus, which the article now implies.

I have no suggestion for a better formulation of the sentence. --Gunst (talk) 20:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That's what's in big letters on his sarcophagus. How about "has been" rather than "was"? SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:57, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. Changed it. --Gunst (talk) 10:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 2011

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:22, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden → Gustavus Adolphus the Great – The articles of people listed as the great usually include the title in the name of the article. Alphasinus (talk) 23:23, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose The article should be moved to Gustav II Adolph of Sweden. His Latin name is Gustavus Adolphus Magnus. The use in English of the first 2/3 of his Latin name was concocted as politically correct at one time (because of Hitler, I believe) but is now outdated. All the other Swedish kings are called Gustav nowadays, not Gustavus. SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:31, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Comment
I agree with SergeWoodzing, the move should not be made. Furthermore, naming should follow WP:RS and WP:COMMONNAME rather than being controlled by an inclusion in the list referred to, which by the way does not present any references for most of the entries. Tomas e (talk) 10:22, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Also the articles of most of the persons on that list are actually not named "the great". It is redirects. --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:43, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * As many other articles have now been redirected to "the Great" I'd suggest we do it here as well. Imonoz (talk) 22:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there any wide-spread English usage of that name form? It is hardly known in Swedish. I note that there are 74 hits in Google books for "Gustavus Adolphus the Great", but over 15000 for just "Gustavus Adoplhus".
 * Andejons (talk) 19:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Requesting different move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 16:44, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden → Gustav II Adolph of Sweden – Move to Gustav II Adolph of Sweden (English spelling) or Gustav II Adolf of Sweden (Swedish spelling)!

It's been 3 years: time to look at this again now.

His Latin name is Gustavus Adolphus Magnus.

The use in English of the first 2/3 of his Latin name was concocted as politically correct at one time (because of Hitler, I believe) but is now outdated. It has never been used as universally as e.g. Charlemagne.

All the other Swedish kings are called Gustav nowadays, not Gustavus. It is unnecessarily confusing to number all of them accordingly, but not this one. SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:23, 21 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose - compare book titles like "The army of Gustavus Adolphus" (1993), "Gustavus Adolphus" (1992), "Gustavus Adolphus: a history of the art of war" (1998). /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:47, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose, we write neither Swedish nor Latin, but English; in English, he is known as Gustavus Adolphus, and always has been (it's Macaulay's usage, and the predominant form (see ngram), even more so in the nineteenth century than now. (Ngrams are a rough guide; but when the difference is so great and long-lasting as here, it would require powerful evidence to disregard it.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:09, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Move to Gustavus Adolphus. Subject is well-known enough to get a common name. Kauffner (talk) 09:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Who is Johannes Burkhardt?
Who is Johannes Burkhardt? Does his opinion really merit twenty lines of text in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sensemaker (talk • contribs) 13:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Military commander
Why does the article have two sections titled "Military commander"? They should be merged and/or retitled.--Anders Feder (talk) 13:36, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100528071504/http://www.aquinas.edu/history/research.html to http://www.aquinas.edu/history/research.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:26, 26 October 2017 (UTC)