Talk:Alexander I of Yugoslavia

Translated name

I can't find much of a rationale in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) for the translation of this king's name throughout the article. I see a pattern in naming foreign monarchs with translated names, especially in the middle ages, and in the page titles so that it's obvious in English. However, the name is properly spelled "Aleksandar" in Serbian and it should at least be used within the article if not in the title. --Shallot 16:33, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The rationale for renaming monarchs is the same rationale that is used for renaming popes. Therefore IMHO this rule should be applied and Alexander should stay Alexander. --Romanm 16:41, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It's also a bit peculiar that this Alexander is marked with "I" (the first) when the naming convention page says that this should be omitted when the person is the only one to bear the name (the previous Aleksandar wasn't of Yugoslavia, and the later Aleksandar wasn't a king). Google:"Alexander of Yugoslavia" returns twice as many hits than Google:"Alexander I of Yugoslavia" even despite the wikipedia-induced pollution of the latter. --Shallot 16:37, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I went on and fixed this. --Joy [shallot] 10:45, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Just to note, he is always called Alexander I, and his grandson, although not king, is known as Alexander II. This is a clear instance where the rule that we never use "I", even when it is the most common way of referring to someone, is wrong. It is just as wrong not to use "Alexander I" as it is to use "Victoria I" for Queen Victoria. I'd add that there are about 1200 hits for "Alexander I of Yugoslavia" and 1600 hits for "Alexander of Yugoslavia", but that many of the hits for the latter are references to the present crown prince, not to his grandfather. john k 21:44, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well, I don't see why the second Alexander deserves the number when they're not a king (nor will they ever be, or any of their progenies either, most likely), but hey. I'm probably biased by the fact that we, in the native language, always say "za kralja Aleksandra" and never tack on "prvog", as there is one single "kralj Aleksandar"... --Joy [shallot]

I've always seen "Alexander I" in English...Also, even if Crown Prince Alexander doesn't deserve a "II" (and the article certainly shouldn't be called that), to have this article at "Alexander of Yugoslavia" is confusing. john k 18:17, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well, that is the primary meaning regardless of a naming convention used... we can add a small disambiguation note like the one at Alexander of Serbia if someone is actually confused by it. --Joy [shallot] 21:06, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)