Talk:James Stuart, Duke of Cambridge

Move
I see no reason why this page should be moved: all agree his name was James Stuart. DrKiernan (talk) 12:36, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Burke's Peerage
 * Complete Peerage, Vol 2, p 496
 * Original manuscripts from the time
 * Haydn's Book of Dignities (see entry for CAMBRIDGE, for example)
 * Nicolas' Peerage
 * Carter's History of Cambridge


 * Of course that was his name, he was baptised James and he was of the House of Stuart, but Prince James was his proper name:
 * Cracroft's Peerage
 * Britain's genealogy
 * This is Cambridge
 * Beatty's English Royal Family
 * and also, James VI and I encouraged the use of these titles. As such, both names were eligible, what difference is it to you? --Alexcoldcasefan (talk) 12:50, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Cracroft, "euweb", and This is Cambridge are not academic sources, and Beatty is a retired accountant from Florida. John Burke (genealogist), Complete Peerage and Nicholas Harris Nicolas are subject specialists and experts. Haydn is a standard reference work. The specialist, expert sources are of far higher quality, and should be taken more seriously than self-published websites, at least one of which has copied material directly from wikipedia without acknowledging that they've done so.
 * You are not following procedure. You must do a requested move for controversial moves. Until that closes the page should remain at its original title. DrKiernan (talk) 13:09, 7 April 2012 (UTC)