Misplaced Pages

:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility): Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:22, 29 June 2007 edit24.192.16.130 (talk) →Other non-royal names← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:33, 22 November 2024 edit undoRemsense (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Template editors59,647 edits →Sovereigns 
(513 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Misplaced Pages subcat guideline|naming convention|Titles|]}} {{Subcat guideline|naming convention|Titles|WP:NCROY}}
{{Naming conventions}}
As royalty and nobility often use titles rather than surnames, often change titles, and are often frequently referred to by names which are not unique, using a clear and consistent nomenclature can sometimes be difficult. This page contains a set of conventions for article titles that have been adopted through discussions between Misplaced Pages editors (see the ] and its archives, and earlier, ]).


General policy on the naming of Misplaced Pages articles can be found at ]. It is generally advisable to use the ''most common form of the name used in reliable sources in English'' ("common name" in the case of royalty and nobility may also include a person's title), but there are other things which should be considered: ease of use, precision, concision, and consistency among article titles; and a system constraint: we cannot use the same title for two different articles, and therefore tend to avoid ambiguous titles. For general guidance on finding titles for articles about people, see ].
As royalty often use titles rather than surnames, and often change titles, using a clear and agreed nomenclature can sometimes be difficult.


Most of the conventions below are intended to apply to medieval and modern European rulers and nobility, since in these civilizations the same given names are often shared between countries, so some disambiguation is often required, and disambiguation by territory is convenient. The principles used here may also be useful in titling articles on Muslim rulers and nobility. Elsewhere, territorial designations are usually unnecessary in article titles.
The following is a set of conventions that have emerged from a detailed discussion on Misplaced Pages. For the discussions, see ] and, earlier, ]. If there are wikipedians out there who know more about this subject, please add to the discussion.


For guidance on how to use titles and names within articles, see ].
Some additional rules for article ''content'' are on ].


For clerical titles (popes, cardinals, etc.), see ].
''Most general rule overall:'' use the '''most common form of the name used in English''' if none of the rules below cover a specific problem.


==Sovereigns==
Most of the conventions below are intended for medieval and modern European and Muslim rulers and nobility, since in these civilizations several countries share the same given names, so some disambiguation is often required, and disambiguation by territorial designation is convenient. Elsewhere, territorial designations are usually unnecessary in names and in article titles.
{{Policy shortcut|WP:COGNOMEN|WP:SOVEREIGN}}
These following conventions apply to European monarchs since the fall of the ] (but not to the Byzantine emperors), because they share much the same stock of names. For example, there are several kings and an emperor who are most commonly called ]; their articles are titled ], ], and so on. The conventions on this page are also recommended, where applicable, for Muslim monarchs, who share their own common stock of names.


For guidance on East Asian monarchs, see '']'' below. Roman emperors are covered by ], and Byzantine emperors by ].
How to use titles and names in articles themselves, check ].


For titles of articles on monarchs (with the exceptions referred to above):
==Monarchical titles==
#Article titles are not normally prefixed with "King", "Queen", "Emperor" or equivalent.
#Pre-emptively ] the names of monarchs, of modern countries in the format ''"{Monarch's first name and ordinal} of {Country}"''. Examples: ]; ]; ].
# Use the most common, unambiguous name: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]. This is in line with ].
#*''This is an exception to the general rule of most common English name.'' Nevertheless, ''Monarch's first name'' and ''Country'' should both be the most common form used in current English works of general reference. This convention is not applied to Roman or Byzantine Emperors, or to the older monarchies of antiquity.
# Only use a territorial designation (e.g. country) when disambiguation is needed. In the case of kings, queens regnant, emperors, and empresses regnant whose common name is ambiguous and not the ], article titles are normally in the form ''"{Monarch's first name and ordinal} of {Country}"''. Examples: ]; ]; ].
#Where there '''has only been one holder''' of a specific monarchical name in a state, the ordinal is used only when the ordinal was in official use. For example, ], not ''Victoria I of the United Kingdom''; ], not ''Juan Carlos of Spain.'' The use of ordinals where there has been more than a single holder of a specific monarchical name is correct and appropriate. For example, ], not ''William of England'', as ] and ] hold the same monarchical name.
#*''Monarch's first name'' should be the most common form used in current English works of general reference. Where this cannot be determined, use the conventional anglicized form of the name, as ''Henry'' above.
#Take care to use the '''''correct'' name of the state''' at the time when a monarch reigned. So it is
#*As regards ''Country'':
##with the '''British:''' monarchs of ''England'' only up to 1707 (e.g., ]), ''Great Britain'' from 1707-1800 (e.g., ]), the ''United Kingdom'' since 1801 (e.g., ]). "England", "Great Britain" and "United Kingdom" describe ''different'' historical states covering different geographic areas, and so they ''do'' need to be clarified.
#**This should be the most common form of the country's name used in current English works of general reference. Where a monarch has reigned over a number of states, use the most commonly associated ordinal and state. For example, ], not ''Charles II of England, Scotland and Ireland''; ], not ''Philip I of Portugal''. It is often desirable to give the other states compensating prominence in the introduction of the article. Create redirects from other possible titles.
##with '''German monarchs:''' Holy Roman Empire until 1806 (e.g., ]), ''Germany'' from 1871 (e.g., ]), Austria after then, etc. Germany is especially complex; when in doubt, refer to ].
##But if an obscure ''official'' name of a state exists alongside a clearly understood one, it is fine to use the more widely known version. For example, ] rather than the technically correct ''Kings of the Hellenes''. #**In most cases, the name of the state is used rather than the form that appears in the monarch's actual title. For example, ] not "of the Hellenes" and ] not "of the English".
#**However, in some cases the title rather than the state is followed, including:
#Where a monarch has '''reigned over a number of states,''' use the most commonly associated ones. For example, ], not ''Charles II of England, Scotland and Ireland;'' ], not ''William I of Prussia,'' although there should be redirects from these locations. When several states are so associated, it is proper and often desirable to give the others compensating prominence in the intro when one gets the name of the article.
#***for the Holy Roman emperors (until 1806): ]
#European monarchs whose rank was below that of King (e.g., Grand Dukes, Electors, Dukes, Princes), should be at the location "{Monarch's first name and ordinal}, {Title} of {Country}". Examples: ], ].
#***for the German emperors (1871–1918): ] (not "of Germany")
#Do not apply an ] in an article title to a '''pretender,''' i.e., someone who has not reigned. For example, use ], not ''Louis XX'' when referring to the legitimist pretender to the French throne. A person may however be referred to if they have a title, for example, ] for the last Italian Crown Prince. But he should not be referred to as ''Victor Emmanuel IV'' even though Italian royalists call him so. Where someone has a disputed title, for example, "Henry V" — whom French Legitimists believed became the ''real'' king of France in 1830 after ] and ]'s abdications — could be referred to as such in the article. Alternatively a disambiguation page could be created, redirecting enquiries about "Henry V" to the page where his biography exists, that is, ].
#Where there has only been one holder of a specific monarchical name in a state, the ordinal is used only when it was in official use, as with ] (not ''Juan Carlos, King of Spain''). When there is no ordinal, the formats ] and ] or ] and ] are used. Exceptions can be made on a case-by-case basis, taking account of general article titling policy, e.g. ], ].
#'''Former or deposed monarchs''' should be referred to by their previous monarchical title with the exception of those who are still alive and are most commonly referred to by a non-monarchical title; all former or deposed monarchs should revert to their previous monarchical title upon death; for example, ] not ''ex-King Constantine II'' or ''Constantine Gluckberg'', ] not the ''Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor,'' but ] not ''Simeon II of Bulgaria''.
#European monarchs whose rank is below that of emperor or king (e.g., grand dukes, electors, dukes, sovereign princes), and whose plain common name is ambiguous, should be at the location "{Monarch's first name and ordinal}, {Title} of {Country}". Examples: ], ], ]. This is often usage, and avoids the question of when these duchies became monarchies, as opposed to noble offices within the Kingdom of Germany/the Holy Roman Empire.
#'''No family or middle names, except where English speakers normally use them.''' The exception holds, for example, for Italian Renaissance dynasts. No cognomens (nicknames) in article titles — they go in the first line of the article; but see exception 4 below.
#Do not apply an ] in an article title for a '''pretender''', i.e., someone who has not reigned; instead call them what independent secondary sources in English call them. For example, use ], not ''Louis XX'', for the legitimist pretender to the French throne. Such a person may however be referred to by a title, for example, ] for the last Italian crown prince. But he should not have his article titled ''Victor Emmanuel IV'' even though Italian royalists call him so. (Such a name should redirect to the article.)
#'''Make redirects''' from other plausible names that people might search for or link to, even if strictly incorrect. For example, ] should have redirects from ], ], ], ] etc.
#'''Former or deposed monarchs''' should be referred to by their previous monarchical title with the exception of those who are still alive and are most commonly referred to by a non-monarchical title; all former or deposed monarchs should revert to their previous monarchical title upon death; for example, ] not ''ex-King Constantine II'' or ''Constantine Glücksburg'', ] not ''Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor,'' but ] not ''Simeon II of Bulgaria''.
#'''No family or middle names, except where English speakers normally use them.''' The exception holds, for example, for Italian Renaissance dynasts. No cognomens (nicknames) in article titles, except when they are the overwhelming usage, as above.
#'''Make redirects''' from other plausible names that people might search for or link to, even if strictly incorrect. For example, ] should have redirects from ], ], ], etc.


These conventions will lead to most rulers having no title in the name of their article. However, there is no convention that an article title in the form ''Name of Place'' implies the subject is royal; ] is one example.
''Exceptions:''
# These conventions do not apply to Eastern and Polynesian civilizations. See also: ], ], ].
# '''Roman Emperors''' do not need the "of the Roman Empire", nor would Pericles be "of Athens" nor Algirdas "of Lithuania" — their names already indicate where they were from. The first line of the article can say when (and which empire) they ruled. Otherwise, we get stuck with Roman Emperor, Western R. E., Eastern R. E., Byzantine E., and (under the ]) Roman Emperor (again). See also ]
# It has been proposed that leaders of a people, rather than a country or nation, (for example, the late antique Germanic tribes) should be called "of the Goths", etc., or have no ethnic disambiguation at all. "Of the Goths", "Picts", "Lombards", are not widely used, but this is a reasonable suggestion when disambiguation is necessary.
# If a monarch or prince is overwhelmingly known, in English, by a cognomen, it may be used, and there is then no need to disambiguate by adding ''Country''. Examples: ], ], ], ], ], etc...". But there must be consensus so strong that it would be surprising to omit the epithet; and the name must actually be unambiguous. For example, although ] is often used, '''Richard I''' is not unusual, so he is at ]; again, if two kings of different countries are both known in English as ''Name'' the Great (for example Louis the Great of Hungary and Louis the Great of France), do not use the epithet but disambiguate them by country (those two are at ] and ]).
#*This exception also applies, but is less common, to persons less than sovereign.


==Consorts of sovereigns==
These conventions will lead to most rulers and their consorts having no title in the name of their article. However, there is no Misplaced Pages convention that an article called ''Name of Place'' implies the subject is royal; ] is one example.
{{Policy shortcut|WP:CONSORTS}}

'''Living''' or '''recently deceased''' royal consorts are referred to by their present name and title, as with ] and ]. The same applies to living ''former'' consorts (sometimes these will have a different title indicating their status as Queen Mother, Queen Dowager, or the like).

'''Deceased''' consorts are referred to by a name by which they are commonly known or (if recently deceased) are expected to become known. This can often differ from the name and title they held as consort or at death. Some examples are given below.
*Many consorts are known in English as "{Name} '''of''' {Place}", like ], ] and ], where {Place} is the country or House of origin. A title may be included, as with ], where it was (as with Prince George) contemporary usage; where it is not, it is not modern common usage either.
*Consorts who are native subjects of their spouses are often known by their maiden name or the title they held in their own right, as with ] and ].
*Sometimes queens and empresses are traditionally known by the name of their husband's country, as with ].
*Sometimes a person may remain best known by the title they held as consort, as in ].
*Sometimes the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, and can be used without any qualifier, as in ].
*For Russian ]s, those of Russian origin have their forename and maiden surname as the article title, while those of foreign origin have their forename and adopted patronymic, with their original name and house in parentheses, e.g. ].
*The titles "Queen" and "Empress" are generally not included in article titles for deceased consorts, although the title of a consort of a lesser ruling prince (duke, grand duke, etc.) may be.
The diversity of these examples reflects the diversity of English usage. There is no agreed-upon general convention for deceased consorts; there was a proposal that Misplaced Pages always use the maiden name, or house of origin, for such people; but that rule produces unrecognisable titles too often to be generally applied.

==Royals with a substantive title==
{{Policy shortcut|WP:NCSUBSTANTIVE}}
# If an individual holds a princely ], use ''"{first name}, {title}"''. Examples: ]; ]; ].
# When dealing with a crown prince(ss) (however not consort) of a state, use the form ''"{name}, Crown Prince(ss) of {state}"'' ''unless'' there is a formal title that unambiguously implies their status as crown prince: ] but ], as the Wales title is traditionally reserved to the heir-apparent.
# If a prince(ss) holds a substantive title that is not princely (a peerage, for instance), use ''"Prince(ss) {first name}, {title}"''. Examples: ] and ].
# Numerals are not generally used. Example: ], not "Prince Richard, 2nd Duke of Gloucester".
# If a prince(ss) holds a substantive title but is not widely known by it, use ''"Prince(ss) {first name} of ..."''.


==Other royals== ==Other royals==
{{Policy shortcut|WP:NCPRINCES}}
For royalty other than monarchs: For royalty other than monarchs:
# If they hold a princely ], use ''"{first name}, {title}"''. Examples: ], ], ]. # Use ''"Prince(ss) {first name} of ..."'' where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title, e.g. ], ], etc.
# If a prince(ss) holds a substantive title that is not princely (a peerage, for instance), use ''"Prince(ss) {first name}, {title}"''. Examples: ] and ]. Numerals are not used. Example: ], not "Prince Richard, 2nd Duke of Gloucester". # Where they have no substantive title, use the form ''"{title} {name} of {country}"'', e.g. ]. Use only the highest prefix title the person ever held and used (roughly before the 17th century, prince/ss would not be prefixed automatically).
# Do not use ], such as ], as part of a title of an article.
# Use ''"Prince(ss) {first name} of ..."'' where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title, e.g., ], ], ], etc.
# Do not use surnames in article titles for such persons. If royals have surnames, then this information should be mentioned in the first line of the article (but care should be taken, as many do not have surnames, and personal surnames may differ from the name of their ]). For details, see ].
# Where they have no substantive title, use the form ''"{title} {name} of {country},"'' e.g., ]. Use only the highest prefix title the person ever held. Deceased royal consorts should not have a title mentioned, e.g., ]. Using royal titles for more junior royals will enable users to distinguish between royal consorts and others. A prefix title can be used only when it was held and used by the person. This means that roughly before the 17th century, prince/ss would not be prefixed automatically.
# Base the article title on the most senior title a person held (this does not always apply in the case of consorts – see ]).
# When dealing with a Crown Prince(ss) (however not consort) of a state, use the form ''"{name}, Crown Prince(ss) of {state}"'' ''unless'' there is a clear formal title awarded to a prince which defines their status as crown prince (e.g., ']', but ']', ']', etc)
# Do not use ] as part of a title of an article; e.g., ] not ''HRH Princess Irene of Greece''.
# Do not use 'surnames' in article names. Most royal families do not have surnames. Many that do have different ''personal'' surnames from the name of their ]. For example, different members of the Royal House of Windsor have a range of surnames: Windsor, Mountbatten-Windsor, etc. Charles, Prince of Wales, for example, is ''not'' Charles Windsor but Charles Mountbatten-Windsor, as are his siblings and all their children. But many of his cousins are Windsor or other names. Similarly, the ] is different to the surnames of some members of the Habsburg/Habsburg-Lorraine family.
# Incorporate surnames ''if they are known'' in the opening line of an article, e.g., ''Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor''. But don't automatically presume that a name of a Royal Family is the personal surname of its members. In many cases it is not. For visual clarity, an article should begin with the form ''"{royal title} {name} {ordinal if appropriate} (full name (+ surname if known, but not for monarchs)"'' with the full name unformatted and the rest in bold <nowiki>(3 's)</nowiki>. In practice, this means for example an article on Britain's Queen Elizabeth should begin "'''Elizabeth II''' (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary)". Using this format displays the most important information clearly without an unattractive excess of formatting. Other information on royal titles should be listed where appropriate in chronological order.
# For '''past Royal Consorts,''' see ] below.
# '''Existing Royal Consorts''' are referred to by their consort name, e.g., ]. But when she dies, she will revert to her pre-marital title, ie, ]. As widow, some appropriate addition (usually announced by the country in question) will be amended to (such as Queen Dowager or Queen Mother), with the new Queen of Spain being referred to by the consort designation. The same rule applies to male royal consorts.
# Use the most senior title received by a royal or noble personage. For example, ] is referred to as such, not ''George, Duke of York'' or ''George, Prince of Wales,'' his earlier titles.
===Past royal consorts===
Many English and French queens are traditionally referred to in English by {Name} '''of''' {Place}, like ], ], or ], where the place is country or House of origin. There is some sentiment that this "maiden name rule" should be generalized into a convention for all past European royal consorts; however, there is limited support for doing so ''contrary'' to actual English usage.


== Nobility ==
This would provide a consistent and largely unambiguous nomenclature for a large number of articles, mostly on subjects who have no surname, properly speaking. It would also avoid a certain anglocentrism present in some actual usage. There is also opposition to a broad usage of this convention, on the following grounds:
*English princesses who marry abroad are often traditionally known by the name of the their husband's country. For example: ]; usage on ] is divided.
*Other queens and empresses are usually known by the name of their husband's country, like ]; in some cases, this is so strong a tendency that the "maiden name rule" produces a name unintelligible to the mere reader of English, like ].
*{Name} of (place), applied to the daughter of a reigning queen, can produce the same name as her mother. The ] is listed as ], not ]; but other cases may not have such titles - and this is still an exception in letter, if not in spirit.
*There is strong disagreement on whether such a rule should apply at all to male consorts of reigning queens - compare ] and ].
*There is little support for such a convention where consorts are native subjects of their spouses, like ] and ].
Where the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, it is pedantry to insist on this form against usage: ], not ].


=== British nobility ===
==Clerical names==
{{shortcut|WP:NCBRITPEER|WP:NCPEER|WP:OBE}}
{{Main|Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Western clergy)}}
# Members of the British ''']''', whether ]s or ]s, usually have their articles titled "Personal name, Ordinal (if appropriate) Peerage title", e.g. ]; ]; ]. Redirects from other names are created as appropriate (e.g. ] redirects to the prime minister, the third article above; but ] is likely to mean any of several men, and redirects to ]).
#*When an individual held more than one peerage, use only the most senior peerage in the article title, e.g. ], not "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and 1st Duke of Lennox" or "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and Lennox". However:
#:*Single peerages with multiple parts should be used in full: ].
#:*If a peer is best known by a title which is not the most senior, that may be used instead, as with ] (not "F.&nbsp;J. Robinson, 1st Earl of Ripon"), ] (not "William Petty, 1st Marquess of Lansdowne").
#:*When individuals became peers but are better known by a ], use that, e.g. ] (not "Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford"), ] (not "Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry").
#:*The use of 1st, 2nd, 3rd... Earl or Baron is a matter of convenience. It is often useful disambiguation (for example, ] could be six of the eight holders of the title); it sometimes identifies a single peer who is called by different first names. When, however, as with some very early earldoms, the numbering is disputed (in the case of the first Scots earldoms, it is artificial) it is acceptable to omit the number or disambiguate by other means. In such cases, redirects or disambiguations from forms with any frequently used numberings are encouraged.
#*There are several exceptions to these rules.
#:*Peers who are almost exclusively known by their personal names, e.g. ] (not "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell").
#:*Peers who are best known by a territorial suffix from their senior title or a courtesy title, e.g. ] (not "Michael Kerr, 13th Marquess of Lothian", or "Michael Ancram, 13th Marquess of Lothian"), ] (not "John Sinclair, 3rd Viscount Thurso", etc.).
#:*Peers who are very well known by their personal names and who only received a title after they retired, e.g. ] (not "Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon"), ] (not "Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher").
#::* An exception to the above exceptions is where the peerage title is useful as ], e.g. ].
#:*When one holder of a title is overwhelmingly the best known: e.g. ] and ].
#*In all cases where the standard form of "Personal name, Ordinal (if appropriate) Peerage title" is not used for the article title, a redirect should exist from the standard form to the article.
#Articles on the '''wives of hereditary peers''' are generally headed {First name} {Married name}, {Title}, as ]; using her maiden name and so calling her ''Georgiana Spencer, Duchess of Devonshire'' would be anachronism. If the husband is a member of the Royal family, his article will usually have no surname; neither should hers: ]. If a cognomen or maiden name is clearly most commonly used for the subject, and is unambiguous, use it for the title: ]; make a redirect from the standard form; if a peeress has had several styles, redirects will be useful.
# ''']s''' should, if no disambiguation is required, have their article located at the simple name, e.g. ] (rather than "Sir George Albu, 1st Baronet"). However, ''if'' the name is ambiguous ''and'' the baronetcy is the best disambiguator from other people with that name, use the full style as the article title: ] (with both prefix and postfix); he shares the name ] with his father and several others.
#*If there is more than one ''Sir John Smith, 2nd Baronet'' then add the ] of the baronetcy (e.g. ] and ]).
#*A baronet should never be referred to with the title but without "Sir" preceding (e.g. do not use "William Williams, 2nd Baronet, of Clapton").
#*A baronet's hereditary title, often held for a large part of his life, should be bolded in the first sentence of the article, as in: '''Sir George Albu, 1st Baronet''' (26 October 1857 &ndash; 27 December 1935) was...
# Titles of ''']''' such as ''Sir'' and ''Dame'' are not normally included in the article title: e.g. ], not "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" (which is a redirect). However, ''Sir'' may be used in article titles as a disambiguator when a name is ambiguous and ''one'' of those who used it was knighted. A person's full title (including both prefix and ]s) should be given in the article itself. Honorary knights – roughly, those not from the Commonwealth realms – are not called Sir; ] have no post-nominals.
# ''']''' – including honorific prefixes such as ''Lord'' or ''Lady'', which differ from full titles in that they are included as part of the personal name, often from birth – should be included in the article title if the person is far better recognised with the title than without. For example, ] is hardly ever called plain "Frederick Cavendish", and so the ''Lord'' is included in the article title.


== Other cases ==
While most names are clear, unambiguous and known, some names associated with clergy of some faiths make this difficult. In those religions which have hierarchies, the higher the level within that hierarchy the greater the likelihood that the person's first name may have ceased to be used publicly, being replaced by a title. Others replace their own name ''completely'' with a new one. As with royals, this requires a different set of guidelines, not least in so far as it may be difficult to discover what their first name actually was, particularly when dealing with ancient historical church clergy at the higher level. The following are the agreed conventions for two levels of senior clergymen:
# Treat other European nobility like British nobility above, adapting for local circumstances; thus ]. For claimants to titles which have been suppressed, as with the dukes of Bavaria, follow the ].

# For '''popes,''' whether ], ], or otherwise, use the format ''"Pope {papal name} {ordinal if more than one} of {]}"''. Popes of Rome should not be linked with their episcopal sees; ''Rome'' is understood. Also, do not use a pope's personal name. For example, use ], not ''Albino Luciani'' or ''Pope John Paul I of Rome''.
# For '''patriarchs,''' whether the ], ], or otherwise, use the format ''"Patriarch {papal name} {ordinal if more than one} of {]}"''. Do not use a patriarch's personal name; e.g., use ], not ''Nikita Minov''. However, if a there is already a well established name in English for a particular patriarch, use that format instead. For example, use ] as the main title of article, with ] and ] as redirects.
#*See also the discussion in the ].'
# In the titles of articles, '''cardinals''' generally go by their full name (both first name and surname) alone, without the title "Cardinal", as "]", not "Cardinal Ascanio Sforza", nor "Ascanio Cardinal Sforza". Exceptions are cardinals who are identifiable only by the cardinalitial title (as in the case of a hypothetical Cardinal John Smith), those best known by the title "Cardinal" followed by a surname (as ]), and those of the period before the introduction of surnames. (For many of the latter, however, their place of origin will serve the same function as a surname.) When it is necessary to add the title "Cardinal", it will usually be sufficient to prefix it to the surname of the cardinal, especially in the body of an article, as "Cardinal Sforza". If both name and surname are used, wikilinking is straightforward if the title is prefixed to the name, as in "Cardinal ]". However, those who prefer the form "Ascanio Cardinal Sforza" should take care to ensure there is a redirect to the form used in the title of the article on the cardinal in question, or use a ].
# '''Saints''' go by their most common English name, minus the "Saint", unless they are only recognisable by its inclusion. For example, ], ] but ]. (See also ].) Make redirects from forms with "St.", "St", and "Saint". Popes who are also saints are given their papal name, with a redirect from the forms with "Saint". For example, ], with redirects from ] and other forms.
# ''Cathedral and church names'', unless ''they'' individually use something different, are written as ''St.'' not ''Saint''. Hence ] not ''Saint Paul's Cathedral'', ] not ''Saint Mary's Pro-Cathedral'', etc.

== Other non-royal names==
# Members of the '''hereditary Peerage''' (people who ''inherit'' their title or have received a title that they may pass down to their heirs e.g., ]), such as a marquess, viscount, count, duke, earl, etc., as with royals have two names. For example Henry John Temple was also the 3rd Viscount Palmerston, hence typically referred to as "Lord Palmerston". Rule here is, "So-and-so, ordinal (if appropriate) title (of) place", and place redirects as you see fit. The sequence number is included since personal names are often duplicated (see ].) Examples: ], or ], with redirect ], which allows both of his names to be included. EXCEPTIONS: When individuals received hereditary peerages after retiring from the post of Prime Minister (unless they are better known for their later career under an additional/alternative title), or for any other reason are known '''exclusively''' by their personal names, do not include the peerage dignity. Examples: ] (not "Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon"), ] (not "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell") (but ] not "Henry Addington"). When individuals held more than one peerage and are best known by a title other than their highest one, use the interim one. Examples: ] (not "Frederick John Robinson, 1st Earl of Ripon"), ] (not "William Petty, 1st Marquess of Lansdowne"). When individuals inherited or were created peers but are best known to history by a ] use that. Examples: ] (not "Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford"), ] (not "Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry"). When a peer holds one or more other peerages of the same rank as his most senior peerage, use only the most senior peerage in the title. Example: ], not "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and 1st Duke of Lennox" or "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and Lennox". Single peerages with multiple parts should be used in full. Example: ], not "Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore".
# '''Life peers''' (ie, people who have peerages awarded exclusively for their lifetime but who neither inherit it nor pass it on to anyone else)&sup1; use the same standard as for hereditary peers: use the dignity in the title, unless the individual is exclusively referred to by personal name. For example: ] (not "Quintin McGarel Hogg"), but ] (not "Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher.")
# An honorific such as ] may refer to any of the holders of the associated title, so can redirect to a page about the title itself.
# ''']''', as they hold hereditary titles, often for a large part of their lives, follow the same practice as hereditary peers and should have their title noted in the beginning of the article. The format is ]. For the article title, this format should only be used when disambiguation is necessary; otherwise, the article should be located at ]. ] should never be used with the postfix and without the prefix.
# '''Titles of Knighthood''' such as ''Sir'' and ''Dame'' should not be included in the article title: use personal name instead, e.g., ] not ''Sir Arthur Conan Doyle''. (But make a redirect from the form with the title if it is well known, thus ] redirects to ].) The article itself should clarify details such as the full title, etc. "Sir" may be used in article titles as a disambiguator. Honorary titles should not be used at all, but the appropriate ] letters or explanation should be in the article. Thus, ] is not "Sir Bob Geldof" in the title and is "Bob Geldof ] (hon.)" in the text. Post-nominals should not be used for non-Commonwealth or former British Empire citizens, as their use outside a Commonwealth context are rare. Knights bachelor have no suffix.
# '''Courtesy titles''' (also referred to as an honorific prefix)&sup2; such as ''Lord'' or ''Lady'' differ from full titles because unlike full titles they are included as part of the personal name, often from birth. As such, they should be included in the article title if a person if ''universally'' recognised with it and their name is unrecognisable without it. For example, the late nineteenth century British politician ] was always known by that form of name, never simply ''Frederick Cavendish''. Using the latter form would produce a name that would be unrecognisable to anyone searching for a page on Cavendish. Similarly, ], the Irish playwright, is more recognisable to readers than ''Augusta Gregory''.
# In general, use the most commonly recognized English-language form of the name. Create redirections or disambiguations for other plausible links. A good way to find this form is to look up the subject in a few reliable English works of general reference. For example, ] is so called in the ''New Cambridge Modern History''. Where this leaves a choice among common names, the simplest unambiguous one is often preferable. Where a person is known by their secondname, the title of the article should be (Second name) (Surname) and the text should begin (First name) (Second name) (Surname), e.g. ].
# Other names and titles, if any, should appear in the first paragraph of the article so they can be searched for. # Other names and titles, if any, should appear in the first paragraph of the article so they can be searched for.
# When dealing with nobles from outside the British Isles, be careful of English idiom for anglicized titles.
# In East Asian names, look at common English usage to decide whether the western first-name last-name or the eastern last-name first-name order should be used. As a rule of thumb, Japanese names should ''usually'' be given in the western, Chinese names in the eastern order. A redirect from whatever order is not used, is almost always a good idea. Again, see ], ], ].
#*British dukes normally have dukedoms, Continental dukes have duchies; but there are exceptions: ] is idiom.
# ] (includes ], ], ],...; also outside the ]): see ]
#*The British peer and his wife are marquess and marchioness; modern idiom for Continental nobles tends to favor ''marquis''. Use ''margrave'' for German {{lang|de|Markgraf}}.

#*British peers (and Scandinavian {{lang|non|jarl}}s) are earls; their Continental equivalents are counts; the wives of British and Continental nobles alike are countesses.

Footnotes:

&sup1; Life peers receive the title of ''Baron''. As a rule of thumb when deciding if someone has a life peerage or hereditary peerage, if the title is marquess, viscount, duke, earl or ''anything but baron'' the peerage can ''only'' be hereditary. However, many barons are not life peers; hereditary baronies also exist. In general, if the peerage was ''created'' before 1958, and the holder is not a judge, it will be hereditary.


==Names and titles outside the West==
&sup2; A ''Courtesy title'' is an honorific prefix applied to the sons and daughters of hereditary peers. For example, ''Lady'' Diana Spencer's courtesy title came via her father's earldom. ''Lord'' John Russell was the second son of the Duke of Bedford. In many cases the holder of a courtesy title is known exclusively by its inclusion (which they may have had from birth) and unrecognisable without it, with the title treated as though it was in effect part of their name. That contrasts to full titles, which are not attached to the ''personal'' name, but exist separately.
When there is no naming convention for a given set of names and titles, and no widespread problem of disambiguation, Misplaced Pages's general practice is to use the most common form in English as the article title.
* In East Asian names, look at common English usage to decide whether the western first-name last-name or the eastern last-name first-name order should be used. As a rule of thumb, Japanese names should ''usually'' be given in the western; Chinese and Korean names in the eastern order. A redirect from whatever order is not used is almost always a good idea. For guidance on articles relating to specific countries, see:
** for China, ] and ]
** for Korea, ] and ]
** for Japan, ]
** for Thailand, ]
** for Burma, ]
*There is no explicit convention for medieval Armenia; since it had both kings and princes, in some sources with identical names and numbers, the full style may be useful for disambiguation. Reliance on analogy with this page may be rash.
* There is no explicit convention for Middle Eastern countries, but contemporary monarchs with Arabic names are often treated much as this guideline would suggest: ], ], ].


==Non-European and non-Western (names and titles)== ==Hypothetical, dissolved and defunct titles==
Do not use hypothetical, dissolved or defunct titles, including pretenders (real or hypothetical), unless this is what the majority of English-language reliable sources use.
Apply ''Most general rule overall:'' use the '''most common form of the name used in English''' if none of the rules cover a specific problem.
* For ], please refer to ].
* For Japan-related articles see ]
* For Thailand-related articles see ]


==See also== ==See also==
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
]

Latest revision as of 15:33, 22 November 2024

Blue tickThis guideline documents an English Misplaced Pages naming convention.
Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page.		Shortcut
Article titles
All naming conventions
Nature
  • Arts
  • Entertainment
  • Media
  • Books
  • Broadcasting
  • Comics
  • Films
  • Manuscripts
  • Music
  • Operas
  • Television
  • Video games
  • Visual arts
    		•
    People
    • Science
    • Technology
    • Transport
  • Astronomy
  • Chemistry
  • Medicine
  • Programming languages
  • Aircraft
  • Ships
    		•
    • Government
    • Politics
    • Law
  • Government and legislation
  • Legal
  • Political parties
    		•
    Organizations
    • Numbers
    • Dates
  • Numbers and dates
    		•
    • Places
    • Events
  • Places
  • Events
    		•
    • Lists
    • Categories
  • Categories
  • Lists
  • Long lists
  • Stub sorting
    		•
    Language/country-specific
    Formatting

    As royalty and nobility often use titles rather than surnames, often change titles, and are often frequently referred to by names which are not unique, using a clear and consistent nomenclature can sometimes be difficult. This page contains a set of conventions for article titles that have been adopted through discussions between Misplaced Pages editors (see the talk page and its archives, and earlier, Misplaced Pages talk:History standards).

    General policy on the naming of Misplaced Pages articles can be found at Misplaced Pages:Article titles. It is generally advisable to use the most common form of the name used in reliable sources in English ("common name" in the case of royalty and nobility may also include a person's title), but there are other things which should be considered: ease of use, precision, concision, and consistency among article titles; and a system constraint: we cannot use the same title for two different articles, and therefore tend to avoid ambiguous titles. For general guidance on finding titles for articles about people, see Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (people).

    Most of the conventions below are intended to apply to medieval and modern European rulers and nobility, since in these civilizations the same given names are often shared between countries, so some disambiguation is often required, and disambiguation by territory is convenient. The principles used here may also be useful in titling articles on Muslim rulers and nobility. Elsewhere, territorial designations are usually unnecessary in article titles.

    For guidance on how to use titles and names within articles, see Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (biographies).

    For clerical titles (popes, cardinals, etc.), see Naming conventions (clergy).

    Sovereigns

    Shortcuts

    These following conventions apply to European monarchs since the fall of the Western Roman Empire (but not to the Byzantine emperors), because they share much the same stock of names. For example, there are several kings and an emperor who are most commonly called Henry IV; their articles are titled Henry IV of England, Henry IV of France, and so on. The conventions on this page are also recommended, where applicable, for Muslim monarchs, who share their own common stock of names.

    For guidance on East Asian monarchs, see Names and titles outside the West below. Roman emperors are covered by Naming conventions (ancient Romans), and Byzantine emperors by Naming conventions (Greek).

    For titles of articles on monarchs (with the exceptions referred to above):

    1. Article titles are not normally prefixed with "King", "Queen", "Emperor" or equivalent.
    2. 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.
    3. Only use a territorial designation (e.g. country) when disambiguation is needed. In the case of kings, queens regnant, emperors, and empresses regnant whose common name is ambiguous and not the primary meaning, article titles are normally in the form "{Monarch's first name and ordinal} of {Country}". Examples: Philip IV of Spain; Henry I of France; Joan II of Navarre.
      • Monarch's first name should be the most common form used in current English works of general reference. Where this cannot be determined, use the conventional anglicized form of the name, as Henry above.
      • As regards Country:
        • This should be the most common form of the country's name used in current English works of general reference. Where a monarch has reigned over a number of states, use the most commonly associated ordinal and state. For example, Charles II of England, not Charles II of England, Scotland and Ireland; Philip II of Spain, not Philip I of Portugal. It is often desirable to give the other states compensating prominence in the introduction of the article. Create redirects from other possible titles.
        • In most cases, the name of the state is used rather than the form that appears in the monarch's actual title. For example, Constantine I of Greece not "of the Hellenes" and Henry I of England not "of the English".
        • However, in some cases the title rather than the state is followed, including:
    4. Where there has only been one holder of a specific monarchical name in a state, the ordinal is used only when it was in official use, as with Juan Carlos I (not Juan Carlos, King of Spain). When there is no ordinal, the formats John of Bohemia and Joanna of Castile or Stephen, King of England and Anne, Queen of Great Britain are used. Exceptions can be made on a case-by-case basis, taking account of general article titling policy, e.g. Queen Victoria, Alexander Jagiellon.
    5. European monarchs whose rank is below that of emperor or king (e.g., grand dukes, electors, dukes, sovereign princes), and whose plain common name is ambiguous, should be at the location "{Monarch's first name and ordinal}, {Title} of {Country}". Examples: Maximilian I, Elector of Bavaria, Jean, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, Albert II, Prince of Monaco. This is often usage, and avoids the question of when these duchies became monarchies, as opposed to noble offices within the Kingdom of Germany/the Holy Roman Empire.
    6. Do not apply an ordinal in an article title for a pretender, i.e., someone who has not reigned; instead call them what independent secondary sources in English call them. For example, use Louis Alphonse de Bourbon, not Louis XX, for the legitimist pretender to the French throne. Such a person may however be referred to by a title, for example, Victor Emmanuel, Prince of Naples for the last Italian crown prince. But he should not have his article titled Victor Emmanuel IV even though Italian royalists call him so. (Such a name should redirect to the article.)
    7. Former or deposed monarchs should be referred to by their previous monarchical title with the exception of those who are still alive and are most commonly referred to by a non-monarchical title; all former or deposed monarchs should revert to their previous monarchical title upon death; for example, Constantine II of Greece not ex-King Constantine II or Constantine Glücksburg, Edward VIII not Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor, but Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha not Simeon II of Bulgaria.
    8. No family or middle names, except where English speakers normally use them. The exception holds, for example, for Italian Renaissance dynasts. No cognomens (nicknames) in article titles, except when they are the overwhelming usage, as above.
    9. Make redirects from other plausible names that people might search for or link to, even if strictly incorrect. For example, George II of Great Britain should have redirects from George II of the United Kingdom, George II of England, George II of Hanover, etc.

    These conventions will lead to most rulers having no title in the name of their article. However, there is no convention that an article title in the form Name of Place implies the subject is royal; Hildegard of Bingen is one example.

    Consorts of sovereigns

    Shortcut

    Living or recently deceased royal consorts are referred to by their present name and title, as with Queen Letizia of Spain and Queen Rania of Jordan. The same applies to living former consorts (sometimes these will have a different title indicating their status as Queen Mother, Queen Dowager, or the like).

    Deceased consorts are referred to by a name by which they are commonly known or (if recently deceased) are expected to become known. This can often differ from the name and title they held as consort or at death. Some examples are given below.

    • Many consorts are known in English as "{Name} of {Place}", like Margaret of Anjou, Isabeau of Bavaria and Mary of Teck, where {Place} is the country or House of origin. A title may be included, as with Prince George of Denmark, where it was (as with Prince George) contemporary usage; where it is not, it is not modern common usage either.
    • Consorts who are native subjects of their spouses are often known by their maiden name or the title they held in their own right, as with Catherine Parr and James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell.
    • Sometimes queens and empresses are traditionally known by the name of their husband's country, as with Marie of Romania.
    • Sometimes a person may remain best known by the title they held as consort, as in Prince Claus of the Netherlands.
    • Sometimes the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, and can be used without any qualifier, as in Marie Antoinette.
    • For Russian tsarinas, those of Russian origin have their forename and maiden surname as the article title, while those of foreign origin have their forename and adopted patronymic, with their original name and house in parentheses, e.g. Alexandra Feodorovna (Alix of Hesse).
    • The titles "Queen" and "Empress" are generally not included in article titles for deceased consorts, although the title of a consort of a lesser ruling prince (duke, grand duke, etc.) may be.

    The diversity of these examples reflects the diversity of English usage. There is no agreed-upon general convention for deceased consorts; there was a proposal that Misplaced Pages always use the maiden name, or house of origin, for such people; but that rule produces unrecognisable titles too often to be generally applied.

    Royals with a substantive title

    Shortcut
    1. If an individual holds a princely substantive title, use "{first name}, {title}". Examples: William, Prince of Wales; Anne, Princess Royal; Leonor, Princess of Asturias.
    2. When dealing with a crown prince(ss) (however not consort) of a state, use the form "{name}, Crown Prince(ss) of {state}" unless there is a formal title that unambiguously implies their status as crown prince: Christian, Crown Prince of Denmark but William, Prince of Wales, as the Wales title is traditionally reserved to the heir-apparent.
    3. If a prince(ss) holds a substantive title that is not princely (a peerage, for instance), use "Prince(ss) {first name}, {title}". Examples: Prince Andrew, Duke of York and Prince Edward, Duke of Edinburgh.
    4. Numerals are not generally used. Example: Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester, not "Prince Richard, 2nd Duke of Gloucester".
    5. If a prince(ss) holds a substantive title but is not widely known by it, use "Prince(ss) {first name} of ...".

    Other royals

    Shortcut

    For royalty other than monarchs:

    1. Use "Prince(ss) {first name} of ..." where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title, e.g. Prince Michael of Kent, Prince Arthur of Connaught, etc.
    2. Where they have no substantive title, use the form "{title} {name} of {country}", e.g. Princess Irene of Greece and Denmark. Use only the highest prefix title the person ever held and used (roughly before the 17th century, prince/ss would not be prefixed automatically).
    3. Do not use styles, such as HRH, as part of a title of an article.
    4. Do not use surnames in article titles for such persons. If royals have surnames, then this information should be mentioned in the first line of the article (but care should be taken, as many do not have surnames, and personal surnames may differ from the name of their royal house). For details, see WP:Manual of Style (biographies)#Royal surnames.
    5. Base the article title on the most senior title a person held (this does not always apply in the case of consorts – see above).

    Nobility

    British nobility

    Shortcuts
    1. Members of the British peerage, whether hereditary peers or life peers, usually have their articles titled "Personal name, Ordinal (if appropriate) Peerage title", e.g. Alun Gwynne Jones, Baron Chalfont; Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington; Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston. Redirects from other names are created as appropriate (e.g. Lord Palmerston redirects to the prime minister, the third article above; but Lord Normanby is likely to mean any of several men, and redirects to Marquess of Normanby).
      • When an individual held more than one peerage, use only the most senior peerage in the article title, e.g. Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond, not "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and 1st Duke of Lennox" or "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and Lennox". However:
      • Single peerages with multiple parts should be used in full: Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne.
      • If a peer is best known by a title which is not the most senior, that may be used instead, as with F. J. Robinson, 1st Viscount Goderich (not "F. J. Robinson, 1st Earl of Ripon"), William Petty, 2nd Earl of Shelburne (not "William Petty, 1st Marquess of Lansdowne").
      • When individuals became peers but are better known by a courtesy title, use that, e.g. Frederick North, Lord North (not "Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford"), Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh (not "Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry").
      • The use of 1st, 2nd, 3rd... Earl or Baron is a matter of convenience. It is often useful disambiguation (for example, Archibald Kennedy, Marquess of Ailsa could be six of the eight holders of the title); it sometimes identifies a single peer who is called by different first names. When, however, as with some very early earldoms, the numbering is disputed (in the case of the first Scots earldoms, it is artificial) it is acceptable to omit the number or disambiguate by other means. In such cases, redirects or disambiguations from forms with any frequently used numberings are encouraged.
      • There are several exceptions to these rules.
      • Peers who are almost exclusively known by their personal names, e.g. Bertrand Russell (not "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell").
      • Peers who are best known by a territorial suffix from their senior title or a courtesy title, e.g. Michael Ancram (not "Michael Kerr, 13th Marquess of Lothian", or "Michael Ancram, 13th Marquess of Lothian"), John Thurso (not "John Sinclair, 3rd Viscount Thurso", etc.).
      • Peers who are very well known by their personal names and who only received a title after they retired, e.g. Anthony Eden (not "Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon"), Margaret Thatcher (not "Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher").
      • In all cases where the standard form of "Personal name, Ordinal (if appropriate) Peerage title" is not used for the article title, a redirect should exist from the standard form to the article.
    2. Articles on the wives of hereditary peers are generally headed {First name} {Married name}, {Title}, as Georgiana Cavendish, Duchess of Devonshire; using her maiden name and so calling her Georgiana Spencer, Duchess of Devonshire would be anachronism. If the husband is a member of the Royal family, his article will usually have no surname; neither should hers: Diana, Princess of Wales. If a cognomen or maiden name is clearly most commonly used for the subject, and is unambiguous, use it for the title: Bess of Hardwick; make a redirect from the standard form; if a peeress has had several styles, redirects will be useful.
    3. Baronets should, if no disambiguation is required, have their article located at the simple name, e.g. George Albu (rather than "Sir George Albu, 1st Baronet"). However, if the name is ambiguous and the baronetcy is the best disambiguator from other people with that name, use the full style as the article title: Sir John Brunner, 2nd Baronet (with both prefix and postfix); he shares the name John Brunner with his father and several others.
    4. Titles of knighthood such as Sir and Dame are not normally included in the article title: e.g. Arthur Conan Doyle, not "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" (which is a redirect). However, Sir may be used in article titles as a disambiguator when a name is ambiguous and one of those who used it was knighted. A person's full title (including both prefix and post-nominals) should be given in the article itself. Honorary knights – roughly, those not from the Commonwealth realms – are not called Sir; knights bachelor have no post-nominals.
    5. Courtesy titles – including honorific prefixes such as Lord or Lady, which differ from full titles in that they are included as part of the personal name, often from birth – should be included in the article title if the person is far better recognised with the title than without. For example, Lord Frederick Cavendish is hardly ever called plain "Frederick Cavendish", and so the Lord is included in the article title.

    Other cases

    1. Treat other European nobility like British nobility above, adapting for local circumstances; thus Philippe II, Duke of Orléans. For claimants to titles which have been suppressed, as with the dukes of Bavaria, follow the general article titling policy.
    2. Other names and titles, if any, should appear in the first paragraph of the article so they can be searched for.
    3. When dealing with nobles from outside the British Isles, be careful of English idiom for anglicized titles.
      • British dukes normally have dukedoms, Continental dukes have duchies; but there are exceptions: Duchy of Cornwall is idiom.
      • The British peer and his wife are marquess and marchioness; modern idiom for Continental nobles tends to favor marquis. Use margrave for German Markgraf.
      • British peers (and Scandinavian jarls) are earls; their Continental equivalents are counts; the wives of British and Continental nobles alike are countesses.

    Names and titles outside the West

    When there is no naming convention for a given set of names and titles, and no widespread problem of disambiguation, Misplaced Pages's general practice is to use the most common form in English as the article title.

    Hypothetical, dissolved and defunct titles

    Do not use hypothetical, dissolved or defunct titles, including pretenders (real or hypothetical), unless this is what the majority of English-language reliable sources use.

    See also

    Category: