Talk:Rex Catholicissimus

Catholicism Low‑importance

Rex Catholicissimus is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes

for Catholicism articles

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: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:56, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Monarchs. Walrasiad (talk) 15:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Support. Britannica`s entry on "Catholic Monarchs" is about Ferdinand and Isabella. As for the singular "Catholic monarch", I googled around and I didn't this see anyone giving this phrase an idiomatic meaning. It's just a monarch who happens to be Catholic. Kauffner (talk) 21:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Date of Spanish title

Since Spain didn't exist in the 1460s, its nonextant monarch could hardly have been granted a title at that time. Did the original editor mean Leon? Castile? Aragon? or a different decade? — LlywelynII 15:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling/move

My Latin is pretty rusty, but surely this should be Rex catholicissimus? Awien (talk) 13:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC) I just googled Rex catholicissimus, which is indeed the form used in all the documents in Latin in the first couple of pages of results. And checked the formation of the Latin superlative, which is indeed -issimus (or -illimus or -errimus), never -ismus. Unless someone comes up with a good source for the present title, I'm going to move the page tomorrow. Awien (talk) 20:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]