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.
Absolutely no mention of the North Berwick witch trials or any of the other persecution of (mostly) women he perpetrated. It’s a dark part of British history and a part of his legacy. ] (]) 06:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Absolutely no mention of the North Berwick witch trials or any of the other persecution of (mostly) women he perpetrated. It’s a dark part of British history and a part of his legacy. ] (]) 06:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
:Absolutely there is. There's a whole section on it. Maybe read the article first? ] (]) 06:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
:Absolutely there is. There's a whole section on it. Maybe read the article first? ] (]) 06:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
::This guy was a real piece of shit. “A man of peace”? Are you joking? And you bury the murder of innocent men and women under the title “Scotland”? Who wrote this??? ] (]) 02:16, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Revision as of 07:41, 18 January 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the James VI and I article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scottish Royalty on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Scottish RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject Scottish RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject Scottish RoyaltyScottish royalty
This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Royalty. For more information, visit the project page.English RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject English RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject English RoyaltyEnglish royalty
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible
Maybe. I agree that article titles should be consistent, and the English/British/UK monarch's article's titles are becoming a veritable hotbed of inconsistency and messy page moves, but I'm not sure about moving this article. I have no strong feelings either way, but I would comment that he is famously the first Scottish monarch to be king of England, and there would likely be some nationalist quarrels from Scotland if it were to be moved (given the ever-so-fragilesituation that they're in at the moment), which is why I have a bit of a reservation about it. I think a more permanent solution would be to create a guideline or policy on specifically British monarchs, which would be achieved via community consensus (WP:NCRAN does, admittedly, do quite a good job in general). Even an essay would be fine, as long as it is given some respect by the community (similar to WP:BRSG). It's just slightly irritating to see the article titles for British monarchs become increasingly, increasingly inconsistent.
King James was a member of the Church of Scotland, and he remained committed to the Church of Scotland. For his religion it should say "Church of Scotland" rather than not having it at all. TheFriendlyFas2 (talk) 06:07, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
He was an Episcopalian. Linking to a Presbyterian church is misleading. Remember this was before the split in the Church of Scotland or the foundation of the Scottish Episcopal Church. As was said elsewhere, he was also baptised Catholic, and he worshipped with the Church of England after 1603. This is too complicated for an infobox, which should be simple and succinct. DrKay (talk) 09:02, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Maybe you're right, he wasn't a Presbyterian but he certainly wasn't an Episcopalian. It wouldn't be misleading to link to the Church of Scotland since that's the denomination that he was a member of, it wouldn't be misleading in the slightest. Though he may have worshipped & been active in the CoE, he kept his Calvinist beliefs & continued to worship with the Church of Scotland, he never made any sort if commitment to the CoE. Also the fact that he was baptized a Catholic doesn't really make any sort of difference because he was never a practicing Catholic & grew up as a Calvinist. Just say he was a Calvinist or a Protestant at the least, or you could even put "Protestant
Prev. Catholic" and it'd be as simple as that. What about that sounds too complicated to you? TheFriendlyFas2 (talk) 01:02, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Seriously? This is far too complicated for an infobox. They are supposed to answer obvious questions, not beg new ones. It's not going to happen. Johnbod (talk) 02:34, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
He supported episcopal polity but he was still Calvinist. It was a very popular movement among the noble laymen in the Church of Scotland. TheFriendlyFas2 (talk) 08:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
He certainly wasn't at the end of his reign - if anything he tried to stamp out Calvinism in the CoE, promoted Laud etc and there was the 5 Articles of Perth. Where's your source for his Calvinism? DeCausa (talk) 08:22, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
When the same editor says in one post "he certainly wasn't an Episcopalian" and then in a following post, with no hint of irony or retraction, "He supported episcopal polity", that doesn't make much sense. Complicated issues are unsuitable for inclusion in an infobox. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
.svg){kind=link}