Talk:Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de' Medici

Requested 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: All moved as requested, unopposed Mike Cline (talk) 15:29, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

– The article titles of ten members of the Medici family of Florence are unsatisfactory. These cases unnecessarily use numerical birth & death dates in the title to disambiguate, rather than their commmon names. Use of dates makes linking harder (and subject to change, as dates are often questionable and corrected, leading to multiple redirects e.g. Giovanni de' Medici (1567–1621) was previously Giovanni de' Medici (1563–1621)). The proposed changes also remove the unusual use of ordering ("II") for Medici family members who do not have titles nor commonly referred to as such (the Medici Grand Dukes of Tuscany are numbered, but not the non-ruling family members). There are conventional ways of disambiguating members of the Medici family that use neither dates nor numbers. The ten changes proposed above incorporate the usual naming conventions. I decided to propose them as a multi-change, rather than individually. A fuller analysis of each of the proposed name changes is given on the talk page of the first, Lorenzo de' Medici (1463–1503) Walrasiad (talk) 10:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Lorenzo de' Medici (1463–1503) → Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de' Medici
 * Lorenzo II de' Medici, Duke of Urbino → Lorenzo de' Medici, Duke of Urbino
 * Giovanni de' Medici (1421–1463) → Giovanni di Cosimo de' Medici
 * Giovanni de' Medici il Popolano → Giovanni il Popolano
 * Giovanni de' Medici (1567–1621) → Don Giovanni de' Medici
 * Carlo de' Medici (1430–1492) → Carlo de' Medici
 * Carlo de' Medici (1595–1666) → Carlo de' Medici (cardinal)
 * Giuliano de' Medici (1453–1478) → Giuliano de' Medici
 * Giuliano de' Medici (1479–1516) → Giuliano de' Medici, Duke of Nemours
 * Pierfrancesco II de' Medici → Pierfrancesco the Younger

FURTHER ANALYSIS For those not in the know, the Medici family were originally from Florence. There were two branches - the senior Medici branch (descended from Cosimo de' Medici) and a junior branch, known as the Popolani (descended from Lorenzo the Elder). In the 15th C., the main branch dominated politics (but did not formally rule) in Florence. In the 16th C., the Popolano branch took over, and eventually (1531) took up the formal title of Grand Duke of Tuscany. For a quick summary of the family, see the Medici family tree. Those curious about how they are treated in Italian original, can click through the tree at the Italian wikipedia

For most historians, and especially art historians, the main branch is the most important, since they presided over the 15th Renaissance and sponsored all the big name artists of the day (Donatello, Botticelli, Michelangelo, etc.). Problem is the Medici repeat the same names a lot: esp. Lorenzo, Giovanni, Piero, Giuliano. As a result, historians have come up with conventions on how to differentiate between them, typically
 * (1) by patronym (e.g. "Lorenzo di Cosimo", meaning, Lorenzo the son of Cosimo), or
 * (2) by nickname (e.g. "Lorenzo the Elder") or,
 * (3) by title (if they have one, e.g. "Lorenzo, Duke of Urbino").

For the reasons mentioned above, dates should not be used in article titles. Neither should number ordering (ordinals are OK for Grand Dukes of Tuscany, but not for the non-ruling members of the family). The conventional methods of disambiguation (patronym, nickname, etc.) worked out and commonly used by historians for the Medici family should be used, and that has been the guid in the changes I have proposed. Let me go through them in turn:

LORENZO. Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici, nicknamed 'il Magnifico', is sufficiently famous to dominate the Lorenzo de' Medici name (as he does here in Wiki). But there are common conventions for the other "Lorenzos". So I propose:


 * Change #1 Lorenzo de' Medici (1463–1503) to Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de' Medici.  This change is the most necessary one. It is the common name found in most books. (Alternatively, use the nickname Lorenzo the Popolano, but the former is more customary for his case).  He is rarely, if ever, called plain "Lorenzo de' Medici". That name is almost always reserved for his contemporary cousin, the Magnifico.


 * Change #2 Lorenzo II de' Medici, Duke of Urbino has a number "II". I don't know why this is there. Possibly to differentiate him from the Magnifico in the Medici line?  Unfortunately, that "II" number is not commonly used. Moreover, it confusingly suggests that he is the second Duke of Urbino called Lorenzo, when he is,in fact, the first.  The number shouldn't be there.  His article title should be simply Lorenzo de' Medici, Duke of Urbino, which is how is commonly referred to.

GIOVANNI The next set of changes (#3 through #5) involve the name "Giovanni de' Medici". Unfortunately, there are a lot of Giovannis. Currently, Giovanni de' Medici is a disambiguation page.


 * Change #3: Giovanni de' Medici (1421–1463) is commonly disambiguated in the literature as Giovanni di Cosimo and so the article title should be changed to Giovanni di Cosimo de' Medici (parallel to his brother, Piero di Cosimo de' Medici).  No need for clumsy dates.


 * Change #4: Giovanni de' Medici il Popolano is a mouthful that is not commonly used. Being contemporary to other Giovannis, he is most commonly referred to simply as "Giovanni il Popolano" or, anglicizing, Giovanni the Popolano. The 'de Medici' is commonly excluded for his case (Giovanni changed his surname to "Popolano" precisely to avoid being called "de' Medici".)  Remember that there are already several other Medici article titles without a "de' Medici" attached, e.g.  Lorenzo the Elder, Piero the Unfortunate, Giovanni dalle Bande Nere, etc.  Giovanni il Popolano is how this one is best known.


 * Change #5: Giovanni de' Medici (1567–1621) is rarely, if ever, called plain "Giovanni de' Medici". He was and is customarily known and referred to as Don Giovanni de' Medici (as already found on the disambiguation page).  I know Wiki style guides asks us to avoid titular prefixes ("Don"), but I think this case should be an exception. "Don Giovanni" is how he is normally known, and normally disambiguated from the others.

If you're curious, the three remaining Giovannis are already differentiated (I think these cases are fine):
 * Giovanni di Bicci de' Medici, the grandfather of them all
 * Giovanni di Lorenzo de' Medici is Pope Leo X.
 * Lesser-known 16th C. Giovanni di Cosimo de' Medici, Archbishop of Pisa (and Don Giovanni's brother), is disambiguated already as Giovanni de' Medici (cardinal).
 * Aforementioned Giovanni dalle Bande Nere

CARLO There are only two Carlos, and both should be changed in the following simple, straightforward manner to avoid dates:


 * Change #6 Carlo de' Medici (1430–1492) should be simply Carlo de' Medici. No need for dates.


 * Change #7 Carlo de' Medici (1595–1666) should be simply Carlo de' Medici (cardinal) (like the case of the cardinal Giovanni above).

GIULIANO There are two Giulianos that used dates in the titles that should be changed:


 * Change #8 Giuliano de' Medici (1453–1478) has dates. This should be changed to plain Giuliano de' Medici, per dominant usage. Giuliano was the brother of Lorenzo the Magnificent, his co-ruler and almost equally famous.  He is easily the dominant Giuliano.


 * Change #9 Giuliano de' Medici (1479–1516) is commonly disambiguated by his title, "Duke of Nemours". And that's what should be done in this case as well.  He should be changed to Giuliano de' Medici, Duke of Nemours.

PIERFRANCESCO


 * Change #10 Pierfrancesco II de' Medici is hardly ever referred to as such. Again, these men are not rulers, and do not use number ordering.  The elder Pierfrancesco's article is simply titled Pierfrancesco the Elder. This one should be consistent, by his common appelation, Pierfrancesco the Younger.

I think all ten changes should be undertaken. That should help improve the article titles, make them stable and easier to link to. If commenting, please refer to which Change # you are referring to.Walrasiad (talk) 10:49, 23 January 2012 (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.