Talk:Children of Henry VIII

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Future of page...[edit]

...starting a section for the debate. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Not every aspect of Henry VIII's life can be examined fully in Henry VIII's article, nor should it, or it would become unwieldy. There is a lot of interest in the heirs (and lack thereof) of Henry VIII, and this article gives the reader that information clearly and concisely - I can see nothing of use to the reader in deleting this/leaving it as a redirect. As a topic, it has been the subject of books by two very well-known historians. If you think the article needs improving, please do so or leave it - but having it means that readers can see all information on this notable topic together clearly. Boleyn (talk) 19:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Quick comments from me, since I was asked for a third opinion:
I'm not an expert on Henry VIII, but I imagine there is probably a fair bit of detail that could go into an article on his children that might not fit well in the main article on Henry, given the academic work into infertility etc. As it stands, it is a bit minimalist though. I tend to find myself on the "inclusionist" side of the argument in cases like this; personally, I wouldn't have created the article anew as it is, but since it's here, I wouldn't push for it to be deleted either. Hchc2009 (talk) 20:49, 28 February 2014 (UTC)


merger from "illegitimate children of Henry VIII"[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge MartinZ02 (talk) 13:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Propose moving all the children from "illegitimate children" to the "children of ..." page. To the extent that the offspring are "alleged" or controversial, then they can have a separate subheading, or an asterisk.

Here's some reasons: (1) The content can easily fit on one page, and that's where it seems best to belong. (2) The titles of the two articles are misleading as to the contents -- this page, for instance, already has one illegitimate child (Henry FitzRoy), who is therefore on both pages. Plus, "illegitimate children" are also, of course, children. (3) Besides "illegitimate" actually being a subcategory of "children", there's not really a good reason to separate on the basis of legitimacy. "Heirs to the throne" is one thing; "heirs" to properties is another (FitzRoy inherited, right?); acknowledged is another. And legitimacy is certainly questionable, right? I mean, Elizabeth was described as a bastard, and there's a plausible legal argument to be made that she was.

In short, the separation isn't necessary, and isn't helpful.

--Lquilter (talk) 03:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Support merge. Boleyn (talk) 08:27, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.