Talk:Victor Amadeus II

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 to Victor Amadeus II. Per consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 09:12, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Google Ngram data shows that he is more commonly referred to as being of Savoy within books, and Wikipedia page view data shows that

• Oppose proposal, but would consider support a move to bare Victor Amadeus II along with all of his successors that aren't there yet (struck per my comment below). Srnec (talk) 00:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Victor Amadeus II of Savoy as the title fits the established conventions better. Randi Moth (talk) 16:07, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  And an immediate rebuttal to my own point: As it seems, recently a consensus has been forming to forego that rule in

  WP:SOVEREIGN and instead go for the concise title names, such as shown in successful moves for French or Swedish monarchs. Therefore, the point with "established conventions" is moot. With this in mind: one of the points that's possible to bring up is consistency of article names of different monarchs of the same country. For the house of Savoy within Sardinia, Charles Felix of Sardinia is the only one who is deemed ambiguous enough to not have a redirect from Charles Felix

  : the rest all do from the title without the location. Consistency may or may not apply here.

  With this in mind, I don't actually have a clear preference between

  Victor Amadeus II of Savoy, but I'd support either one above the current name. I would edit the move request to represent this, but I'm not sure whether this is allowed. Randi Moth (talk) 17:08, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Note that if we move just this title to the simpler form, we will have perfect consistency. All the dukes before VAII are "[name] [ordinal], Duke of Savoy", all the kings after are "[name] [ordinal] of Sardinia". Then we get to Victor Emmanuel II at the simple title (and for the same reason) followed by his successors at "[name] [ordinal] of Italy". In other words, exceptions to the rules at constitutional inflection points. Srnec (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to
  concision. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Support as nominator – Indeed, it's a blunder on my part that I didn't validate entirely whether the "... of Savoy" syntax is correct. I agree that Victor Amadeus II is the preferred outcome. Randi Moth (talk) 20:20, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]