Talk:Roman d'Alexandre

Requested move

 * 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. 

The result of the proposal was no consensus to support move. JPG-GR (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Li romans d& → Roman d'Alexandre — Roman d'Alexandre is the name generally used in English language scholarship on this French text. — NYArtsnWords (talk) 03:04, 27 September 2008 (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 move: Not only is Roman d'Alexandre the common form in English language scholarship, but appears to be quite regular in French scholarship, as well. Li romans d'Alixandre is much less common.  Plus, I know that it's not conclusive, but the French Wikipédia use the title Roman d'Alexandre, as well.   Maedin \talk 07:10, 5 October 2008 (UTC) Following Srnec's NB, I've struck my comment as it's possible that I've managed to get a few works confused.   Maedin \talk 07:13, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Nota bene: this article is about a single work by Alexandre de Bernay. The French article Romance d'Alexandre is about the subject of our Alexander romance, a genre of which Bernay's compilation/composition is just one example out of many in one language out of many. Srnec (talk) 04:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

The subject of Alexander romance is very confusing. All separate works should be treated in separate articles. Works by different authors should be treated separately. Srnec (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Notice that the website that Alexander romance used for their bibliography (Alexander the Great: The Medieval French Tradition/The Medieval Alexander Project at the University of Rochester) uses "Roman d'Alexandre" to refer to the text this article talks about. Only the 19th century Stuttgart edition uses the (now unused) "Li Romans d'Alixandre" title. - NYArtsnWords (talk) 18:42, 29 September 2008 (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.

Requested move redux
While the above Move Request appears to have been tabled, I still feel that the use of "Li romans d'Alixandre" as this article's title is unfortunate, as all the contemporary scholarship on the Medieval French text compilation described in this article uses Roman d'Alexandre. To answer Srnec's concern that the French wikipedia article called "Roman d'Alexandre" deals only with the general question of the Alexander Romance in all of its texts, it seems to me we could do one of the following: I'm open to whatever works, but the article title, as it stands, is needlessly archaic and unused. -NYArtsnWords (talk) 14:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * rename this article Roman d'Alexandre (French) or Roman d'Alexandre (Old French) or Roman d'Alexandre (Medieval French) or Roman d'Alexandre (work) or Roman d'Alexandre (12th century), etc.
 * OR rename the general article Alexander romances or Alexander Romance (general), etc.
 * OR rename/break apart the French wikipedia article to mirror the English wiki.


 * My only overriding concern is that different works by different authors in different formats from different times and in different dialects should not be confused. As long as this article is about the work of Alexandre de Bernay, I have no problem with either title. All medieval French Alexander romances are not the same and are not a single work. They deserve separate articles as much as any distinct literary treatments of the same theme do. My retiscence to support the move requested was based on my uncertainty over whether Romance d'Alexandre was exclusive enough for the Bernay work. Srnec (talk) 20:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Manuscript sources exist and deserve mention
Especially the Bodleian MS 264 is an ornate and significant book, and deserves mention (even a picture if one could be gotten, but Oxford guards them closely). There are other medieval Mss also worth discussing, and in fact the fact that such works have come down to us in such good condition suggests the importance of the tale to the cultural community in which they were made and by which they were kept so carefully.108.20.41.15 (talk) 23:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Need to correct the link to the Rochester Med. Project
http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/alexander/alexhomepage.htm

The other one doesn't work anymore.108.20.41.15 (talk) 23:07, 18 June 2011 (UTC)