Talk:Amadeo I of Spain

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Spain High‑importance

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Italy Mid‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 11, 2005 and February 11, 2006.

On 11 January 2024, it was proposed that this article be

Amadeo I. The result of the discussion

was no consensus.

Amedeo

In Italian it is Amedeo, isn't it?

It is. Amadeo is Spanish. 82.161.19.51 14:42, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Puccini & Amedeo I

Is this Amedeo di Savoia, duca d' Aosta, the same that Puccini dedicated his "Chrisantemi" to? And in case he is, then does anybody know anything about WHY Puccini dedicated C. to him? thanks,

Alejandro

Descends from Philip II of Spain

I think is important to put that Amadeo is a descendant of King Philip II through his daughter Catherine Michaela and his grandson Thomas Francis, because this dynastic liaison with the legitimate Hapsburg House was instrumental in the choosing of Amadeus to be King of Spain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.209.83.77 (talk) 16:29, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved except Amadeo I as per consensus. GoodCrossing (talk) 22:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amadeo I of Spain → Amadeo I
Alfonso XII of Spain → Alfonso XII

Alfonso XIII of Spain → Alfonso XIII

Felipe VI of Spain → Felipe VI

Juan Carlos I of Spain → Juan Carlos I

– per

WP:NCROY, if the regnal name and number are unambiguous, use them Interstellarity (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

This is a contested technical request (

talk) 22:56, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

I oppose them since they are, in fact, ambiguous. For example, Amadeus I, Count of Savoy is also known as Amadeo I in Spanish, and Felipe VI could refer to Felipe VI of Navarre (better known as Felipe IV of Spain). And let's not forget Alfonso XII de Castilla el pretendiente, who never became king. Neodop (talk) 21:24, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support, because they are completely unambiguous in English-language literature. Nobody is going to look up a medieval Savoyard ruler on English Wikipedia under a Spanish name. Even if there were any ambiguity in the titles (which there is not),
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC would still apply. Surtsicna (talk) 09:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose Amadeo I, which is unrecognizable. Who even notices the difference between Amedeo and Amadeo at a glance? And who actually calls him the First, given there was no second? As for the rest, I don't see the benefit. Srnec (talk) 15:11, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have added Juan Carlos to this discussion since that should be discussed as well before moving. Interstellarity (talk) 18:02, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per conciseness for most. Unsure on Amadeo, since it's not quite as unique. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.110.217.186 (talk) 17:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning towards support, chiefly because the fact that the intended titles currently redirect at them suggests that they are WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (obliterating the arguments about potential obscure ambiguities) to begin with while adhering to WP:CONCISE. The case of Amadeo could be a bit more tricky. "King Amadeo" (as in Queen Victoria) could be an alternative (differences in length of reign notwithstanding, hehe :) ).--Asqueladd (talk) 05:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the Alfonsos, Felipe and Juan Carlos, as per
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Unsure about Amadeo. His name is too similar to the Latin "Amadeus" and the Italian "Amedeo" to be clearly unambiguous, and he was not a particularly well-known, fruitful or long-lasting King when compared to all the other ones listed. I'd say that the country in the title doesn't hurt in his case, but I don't have a strong opinion on this. Impru20^talk 00:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Support for the latter four, especially for
WP:PTOPIC. Donna Spencer^{talk-to-me⛅} 22:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 11 January 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. There is no consensus to move the article to

Amadeo I or King Amadeo, as the supporters and the opposers have strong arguments on both sides. The alternative proposal has not received much feedback and may need further discussion. Therefore, the article should remain at Amadeo I of Spain until a clear consensus emerges. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:32, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

WP:COMMONNAME. Векочел (talk) 03:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: WikiProject Biography has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Spain has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Italy has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. People cannot be expected to know the Amadeo–Amedeo distinction, especially given Amadeus. The short page name is just not clear. Srnec (talk) 15:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Amedeo is a frequently used name in the House of Savoy. We need to disambiguate him from his kinsmen. Dimadick (talk) 01:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per Dimadick. King regards, Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 19:56, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to King Amadeo.--Asqueladd (talk) 20:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I don't really understand the logic of the above opposes. They say that the name is ambiguous with people called Amedeo or Amadeus or whatever, but that's really not the discussion here. We want to move to
WP:NCROY. Note also that Felipe VI has been established with a similar name, despite the existence of other entries at Philip VI, so there's no need to worry about other language names here. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 14:38, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

There is no spelling difference in Italian or Spanish. And this is English-language Wikipedia, meaning our English-speaking readers should not be forced to guess which one Wikipedia editors arbitrarily decided to spell in Italian or Spanish or English. Multiple figures have the same damn name. Clearly ambiguous and fails

WP:NCROY. Walrasiad (talk) 02:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Clearly not the same name. One has an E and one has an A. Your assertion that it is "clearly ambiguous" is inaccurate. There is no reason in guideline or evidence as to why this shouldn't be moved. — Amakuru (talk) 09:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is exactly the same name. In texts, he is referred to as both Amadeus and Amadeo. Wikipedia readers should not have to guess or know in advance the perverse taste of some Wikipedia editor who arbitrarily decided to nativize the spelling of one figure and not the other. It is clearly ambiguous. Walrasiad (talk) 11:23, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per all the otehr discussions on dropping countries from monarch's titles—blindlynx 16:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. per
WP:RECOGNIZABLE. Clearly ambiguous and unrecognizable. Any Amadeo can be construed as Amadeus & vice-versa. Walrasiad (talk) 22:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose, nothing has changed since previous RM. Bensci54 (talk) 15:10, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the revised
WP:NCROY guideline, and per CONCISE, PRIMARYTOPIC, COMMONNAME, and the DAB principle that we don't disambiguate except when necessary. That this name is fairly similar to some others isn't really material; hatnotes exist for a reason. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:00, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
It isn't mere similarity. He was Italian. He is as much Amedeo as Amadeo. Srnec (talk) 21:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support removing unnecessary disambiguation, in line with applicable
guidelines. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.