Jump to content

Talk:Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JamesOredan (talk | contribs) at 16:44, 11 March 2019 (→‎Issue with JamesOredan, who has just returned after a block because of sockpuppeting.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Titles?

"Charles, by the grace of God, Holy Roman Emperor, forever August" Really? I never saw the "Holy" part in any other context than for the empire, never the emperor. They would always call themselves "emperor of the Romans".MacX85 (talk) 19:38, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to people by titles they did not have at the time

It is very confusing if the article refers to people by ranks and titles they did not hold at the time.

-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:45, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that is due to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, so there's nothing we can do about it. Sorry :( Mdob (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No. User:Toddy1 already fixed the problems. William Avery (talk) 16:54, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good article candidate, maybe?

Henry the VIII is already a Wikipedia:Good article. Is anybody interested in sending this article through the Wikipedia:Good article nomination process? I would, but I need someone to share the responsibilities and toil. Comments? Mdob (talk) 16:45, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Charles V as builder of the State in Spain.

The most important work Charles V made in Spain was the construction of the state, which came to last for centuries. Most of the State was taken from the Crown of Castile (not the Kingdom of Castile); but Charles also added some details he brought from Flanders to Spain.-80.28.231.217 (talk) 19:10, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

the number V is also in Spain !

Of course, because if you say "Charles I of Spain" you are forgetting the Charles, kings of Navarre. Thus you use the numbers of the kings of Asturias (-Leon-Galicia) only, and you forget the kings of Navarre, who were Spanish as well ! ---80.28.231.217 (talk) 19:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Navarre had only three kings named Charles before Emperor Charles V, and the Navarrese numbers are not considered. The present king is thus Philip VI rather than Philip VIII. Surtsicna (talk) 19:48, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
but in Wikipedia we can read of "Charles IV of Navarre" - --80.28.231.217 (talk) 20:07, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Abdication as Emperor

I read on a royalty page on Facebook that his abdication as Emperor was not accepted by the Imperial Diet until 1558 even though he signed it in 1556. Should the date for the end of his reign be changed? Does anyone have a source to confirm. Emperor001 (talk) 21:27, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with JamesOredan, who has just returned after a block because of sockpuppeting.

User:Surtsicna. If you want to know what's going on, here's what I think I understood about the whole thing.

An absurd Edit War against me over this page and the page Empire on which the sun never sets started with James Oredan some weeks ago. He was blocked on my request because it was verified that he used sockpuppets but now he's back.

His basic goal is to turn Charles V into a Spanish and all of his dominions (the first to be referred as "the empire on which the sun never sets") into Spanish, because he feels threatened that somehow the historical reality of the personal union/composite monarchy of Charled V reduces the historical significance of Spain (which is absurd, and btw I love spanish history).

At this scope, he wants to cut off the burgundian and german territories from the "empire on which the sun never sets". This is also non-sense as all the 4 million KMs from Vienna to Peru was defined that way. There's not evidence that somehow only the parts left to Philip II were defined with that term during his lifetime.

This is also why he wants to put the title of Emperor below that of King. But that change in the infobox would not make any sense because his highest title was that of Emperor (if look at the page of Otto I, Holy Roman Emperor or Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor or the infobox as it looke a month ago, all had the first title as Holy Roman Emperor).

So He made up the title of "King of Spanish Empire" and downplayed the origins of Charles V in the flanders/burgundian circle because he wants to say that the first title of Charles V was in Spain and from there he acquired the other titles. Of course in reality, he actually acquired his titles because his mother had some inhritances and his father others.

James, I don't think readers are stupid, explaining in details the nature of his rule does does not diminish the importance of Spain historically. Barjimoa (talk) 14:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have the same impression, Barjimoa. This edit-warring is very disruptive and JamesOredan has already broken WP:3RR. If the edit-warring continues, he should be reported. Surtsicna (talk) 16:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What a tremendous bullshit you just let go.

To start the famous Sockpuppet I did not commit it, and they still nailed me 14 days of banging.

The reason why I correct the edition is because it shows that you have no idea of history. You put Castillan instead of Castilian, you said that during Charles V there was no Spanish Empire but an Empire of Charles V, which is false.

It is not that I love Spanish history and that is why I exalt the Spanish (Also) but that you were constantly minimizing the Spanish presence even in the Conquistadores of the Americas.

I do not know what kind of problems you will have, but do not tell me your life to me.

And the threat of the useless moderator gives me exactly the same. This site is literally a dictatorship of inept people.

[User:JamesOredan|JamesOredan]] (talk)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Charles_V,_Holy_Roman_Emperor&oldid=887273424"