Talk:Alexis of Russia
|WikiProject Russia / History||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
|WikiProject Biography / Royalty and Nobility||(Rated C-class)|
|Alexis of Russia has been listed as a level-4 vital article in People. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
Should he be numbered - I can't find a Tsar Alexis II, so shouldn't he just be Alexis? 184.108.40.206 01:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Of course he is Tsar Alexis in every reputable source, e.g., Encyclopedia Britannica. I tried to eliminate the numbering but was reverted. --Ghirla | talk 11:17, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Flowery POV passage
The following passage struck me as too flowery and partial for an encyclopaedia. For it to stay in, in my opinion, it needs specific citation from a historian (did this Sergey Platonov say all this?) and, preferably, to be put in quotations, because it is emotional rather than factual. Any opinions?
But it is sufficient for Sergey Platonov to proclaim him the most attractive of Russian monarchs. He acquired the moniker Tishayshy, which means "most quiet" or "most peaceful". Certain aspects of Russian Orthodoxy, not its most purely spiritual, but its aesthetic and worldly aspects, found in him their most complete expression. The essence of Alexei's personality is a certain spiritual Epicureanism, manifested in an optimistic Christian faith, in a profound, but unfanatical, attachment to the traditions and ritual of the Church, in a desire to see everyone round him happy and at peace, and in a highly developed capacity to extract a quiet and mellow enjoyment from all things.
--qp10qp 15:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- It certainly sounded like a direct quote, but that's the trouble: it's presented as part of the text, in which case it merely seems a random contradiction of what went before about the tsar's wars and comes over as unencyclopaedically sentimental. If you have access to the source, could you possibly put it in quotes and give an inline reference? If not, I will reframe the passage as a paraphrase and broadly ascribe it to the historian you mention.qp10qp 12:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- Cheers. I've gone ahead and put the paragraph in quotes. Please correct me if I've put too much in. qp10qp 00:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Return of Boris Morozov
- I've added a sentence to the article about his return. OmgItsTheSmartGuy (talk) 02:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- I came here to say the same thing. It is absurd that a vague mention of "the disgrace of Nikon" is the only reference in the article to one of the most important features of Alexei's reign. As a matter of fact, I cannot find any decent Wikipedia treatment of the schism; the Old Believers article is simultaneously too vague (hardly any dates) and too detailed, and I suspect it of being unacceptably POV. At any rate, there should be at least a brief description of the events of 1666-67 here. Languagehat (talk) 19:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sometimes articles languish, this appears to be one of them. I don't know what happened in 1666-67 but apparently something of some importance, I just came here to note that this article doesn't describe in any way the circumstances of his death. --BHC (talk) 20:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
When was he born?
The first paragraph says "(9 March [O.S. 19 March] 1629". That can't be right, but are the N.S. and O.S dates reversed, or is there an error in the conversion? (The converter at http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/calendar/ says 9 March 1629 N.S is 27 February 1629 O.S.). Also, Michael I of Russia#Issue says 9 May 1629, no indication whether it's N.S or O.S 220.127.116.11 (talk) 18:42, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/14522/Alexis says: (born March 9 [March 19, New Style], 1629, Moscow, Russia—died Jan. 29 [Feb. 8], 1676, Moscow) , so it looks like the N.S. and O.S dates were reversed. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 05:01, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
|It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.
A bot will list this discussion on Wikipedia:Requested moves within half an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached. For information about closing discussions, see WP:Requested moves/Closing instructions. Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.
– Right now, we have two different pairs of naming conventions with these three articles. On one hand, we have an Alexis and an Alexei, while on the other hand we have Michael I (not Michael) and Alexis (not Alexis I). We ought to have the "I" following both or neither tsars' names, and Алексе́й ought to be Alexis or Alexei both times; whether we use Alexei versus Mikhail is a completely different issue, so please don't bring that in. A simple search, even of scholarly literature, wouldn't be hugely helpful here, because it would quite possibly return results that discuss just one or the other: either we need to rely on sources that discuss both men, or we need to consider one-man results as applying to both. I've not read much scholarly stuff that discusses them, so I can't bring any solid examples to the table; all that comes to mind is Robert K. Massie's biography of Peter, in which both men are Alexis. I have no opinion on either pair of moves, i.e. I don't care whether they're both Alexis or Alexei and whether or not we include the "I" (the proposed new names up above are simply to ensure that the WP:RM bot doesn't get confused), as long as we have consistent transliteration of Алексе́й and consistent usage or non-usage of "I". Nyttend (talk) 17:32, 23 July 2014 (UTC)