Talk:Henry Probus

Initial text
Earlier article:

Henry of Bresslau is recorded in the Codex Manesse or Grosse Heidelberger Liederhandschrift, a book containing poems by famous German poets and rulers of the 12st and 13st century. This book contains illustrations and it shows duke Henry IV (- 1290) of Schlesien Bresslau as Heinrich von Pressela displaying the Silesian eagle. This has to be among the the worst of H.J.'s "contributions" to date: no header ordinal, no title, can't even spell the place (Henry the what of Breslau?); it doen't even mention his having been senior prince of Poland (the nearest thing to a head of state of the whole country in 1138-1320 in the absence of a king), a rather more important matter than his having once written some poetry.

It's quite obvious that the writer has never heard of the subject before and knows nothing about him other than one obscure occurence of his name. So why even attempt to write such an abysmal article about a well-known ruler without the slightest effort to find out about him (in fact most of it is about the book)? And why is the form "Heinrich von Pressela" ("Henry of Breslau", already referred to in both heading and article) so worthy of particular note? David Parker

Untitled
Henry of Bresslau is recorded in the Codex Manesse or Grosse Heidelberger Liederhandschrift, a book containing poems by famous German poets and rulers of the 12st and 13st century. This book contains illustrations and it shows duke Henry IV (- 1290) of Schlesien Bresslau as Heinrich von Pressela displaying the Silesian eagle.

--
 * I have changed "territory of Breslau (now Wroclaw Poland) because:

1. At that time it was still Poland - duchy of Wroclaw was nothing more than one of many duches of fragmentated Poland. All of the dukes were (at least in theory subdued to senior duke of Poland. 2. According to my knowledge Wroclaw is more used in English.
 * Breslau was the common use in English, and it was even used in the English Potsdam Conference summaries. Heinrich von Pressela indicates the Breslau which was used simultaneously already. Like Bruges and Brugge. But not a Polish 1946 imposed form. This is anachronism.Smith2006 (talk) 09:51, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Disruptive move
This move was done without discussion, without a proper RM, and then the user salted the original. This kind of behavior is disruptive. I would appreciate if the page was moved back.Volunteer Marek (talk) 20:57, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

A proper RM can of course can be conducted subsequently.Volunteer Marek (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have restored to original namer for you. You can request at WP:RM if the page is required to be moved. Keith D (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * See below. Justifiable change and move. Thanks for respecting historical objectivity in wikipedia, without taking one Polish or German side in the debate over Silesia.Smith2006 (talk) 09:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I have restored to original title and move protected. Please discuss here and agree a name for the article. A request to WP:RM should be made if a change of title is agreed upon. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 10:38, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Reason for moving
Like Boleslaw I the Tall, Henry IV the Righteous cannot be called "Probus" in an English wiki. This is not a Polish wikipedia after all. Also, the names of towns should be as common in the 13th century Silesia under the Holy Roman Empire, when the German original, first-written forms were used. This means Glogau, Oppeln. And not 'Glogów' and other attempts to revise and falsify Medieval history. However desirable from the Polish national point of view this may seem. I hope you respect historical objectivity in this lemma, which was moved. Or can we no longer use August the Strong, should this be Polonized in an English wikipediaSmith2006 (talk) 09:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Please stop move warring. For starters, before you start making personal attacks, you might want to consider the fact that neither the word "Henry" nor the word "Probus" are Polish. The first one is straight up English, the second one is the Latin name by which he is referred to in English language sources. He is not called the "the Righteous" - you've pretty much invented that because apparently you're offended by the designation "Probus" which you mistakenly believe to be Polish. Are you going to go and move the Marcus Aurelius Probus article too?
 * And Henry Probus was primarily the High Duke of Poland. Silesia was only one of his holdings so putting "duke of Silesia" (which is not even capitalized correctly) is simply silly - and yes, it is a form of disruptive POV pushing.Volunteer Marek (talk) 09:53, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * And just to actually use some evidence "Henry Probus" gets 51 hits on gbooks, including the Cambridge History of Poland (note that this search already should already screen out Polish language works since in Polish it's "Henryk" not "Henry"). "Henry the Righteous" gets 14 hits , but almost all of these are either false positives for the phrase "Henry. The righteous..." , not this guy, or someone else (some Spanish guy?), or in reference to an English king "Henry the righteous and peace-loving King of the English" . Taking those out leaves about 3 hits which all use the formulation "Henry IV Probus (Henry the Righteous)".Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * This is why I added Henry IV the Righteous, duke of Silesia. This explains the difference. There are more Philip the Pious too. But 'Henryk IV Probus' is your Polish version for a duke who never was an ethnic Pole to begin with. No more than Bogdan Chmielnicki was a Pole at least.Smith2006 (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 14 March 2024

 * 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: moved. No objections to the move after more than a month. (closed by non-admin page mover) Celia Homeford (talk) 10:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Henryk IV Probus → Henry Probus – Per WP:NCROY. "Use the most common, unambiguous name: Carl XVI Gustaf, Elizabeth II, Alfonso XII, Louis XIV, William the Conqueror, John Balliol, Mary, Queen of Scots, Eric of Pomerania, Charlemagne. This is in line with WP:COMMONNAME." "Henry Probus" is more common than "Henryk Probus" "Henryk IV Probus" (the current title) and "Henry IV Probus" UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 20:52, 14 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 02:04, 23 March 2024 (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.
 * Neutral: It's rather difficult to tell what's the most common in this case on Google Ngrams (linked by nom) when you look at recent decades and vary the smoothing settings. There isn't really a stable leading term from year to year until you move up to smoothing of 30 or more, at which point Henry IV Probus is the leader. And with frequencies as small as this, Google Ngrams tends not to be very informative. So I'm not sure. SilverLocust  💬 07:12, 31 March 2024 (UTC)