Talk:Xenia Borisovna of Russia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Russia Mid‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 6 September 2023

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: no consensus (non-admin closure). Most participants agree that consistency is preferable across these articles for daughters of Russian tsars, but there is no agreement on whether this set of articles should be renamed or if the articles with "Tsarevna" already in the title should be the ones to be renamed. Jenks24 (talk) 10:58, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– Tsarevna is basically a title of princess who is the tsar's daughter, this would create consistency in naming pages of older generations of Russian tsarevnas and would be in line with how articles on princesses are titled. Killuminator (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 01:52, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support There are already two pages that follow the format "Tsarevna [Name] of Russia": Tsarevna Praskovya Ivanovna of Russia and Tsarevna Yevdokia Alekseyevna of Russia. The suggested moves ensure consistency across all similar pages. Keivan.f^Talk 23:52, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom and WP:NCROY, which has us use "Prince(ss) [Name] of [Place]. This is the same idea, simply using Russian titles. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:16, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I don't see anything about this at WP:NCROY, I don't think we have a consistent standard about how princesses are named. Generally we tend to avoid using titles in articles, and the term "Tsarevna" might not be widely understood outside Russia. If it ain't broke don't fix it, and keep it simple stupid. PatGallacher (talk) 12:59, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NCROY is not a policy but WP:TITLECON is. And it is broken because the whole thing is a mess; there is no consistency and it appears that the pages were named in accordance with WP:CONSORTS which is reserved for the wives of monarchs not their daughters. And we do use non-English titles in article names (ex. Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia; Razia Sultana, etc.). Keivan.f^Talk 17:40, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency is the fifth, last criterion among WP:CRITERIA. The insertion of long unfamiliar nobility titles into the titles of the articles defeats at least two listed above the consistency: (1) Recognizability - as the name is now hidden behind a word that is cryptic to most English readers, (2) Concision - there are no more people in history named Xenia Borisovna (with no last name), so we do not need a lengthy title to distinguish this particular one. Викидим (talk) 20:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: it seems that until the Wikipedia age, the romanization Alekseevna was clearly more common than Alexeyevna,[1] and should probably be used unless there is specific evidence the proposed new title is the WP:COMMONNAME or there has been a recent WP:NAMECHANGE. Tatiana is more common than Tatyana,[2] and shouldn’t the two names have consistent y-based or i-based romanization, either Tatiana Mikhailovna or Tatyana Mikhaylovna?[3] There is a mix of romanized and anglicized names, including Xenia (not Kseniia/Kseniya), Sophia (Sofiia/Sofiya), Maria (Mariia/Mariya), Catherine (Katerina), and Feodosia (Feodosiia/Feodosiya): is there evidence the proposals are all COMMONNAMEs for the respective subjects? —Michael Z. 19:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It might be beneficial to examine ngram charts for variations in use. For example, Sofiia Alekseevna and Sophia Alekseevna are the two most commonly used versions.[4] —Michael Z. 19:10, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My personal preference would be "Alekseevna", too. However, the "ye" spelling in English has a fairly long history, cf. [5]. --Викидим (talk) 22:22, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom and per convincing analysis by Keivan.f. BD2412 T 01:17, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'd like to point out that the brothers of these women, excluding the ones who became rulers, all follow the proposed name format with the sole exception being Dmitry of Uglich but he's a special case as he's a saint. This is another argument for consistency, there's no reason why the women should have an inconsistent naming standard. Killuminator (talk) 19:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tsesarevichs of Russia does not show consistency for males either. Also note that Russian Wikipedia (where many readers can explain the difference between Tsarevich and Tsesarevich) avoids using these titles in the article names. For an average reader here who does not know Russian, these words are devoid of information. Викидим (talk) 19:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We're not bound by anything used on the Russian Wikipedia and Tsesarevich is not the topic of discussion. Killuminator (talk) 19:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(1) We are indeed not bound here by any customs used in Russian Wikipedia, Russian encyclopedias published anytime in the 19th-20th-21st centuries, even English-language Britannica. However, when all of these very diverse sources suggest that the titles of encyclopedic articles about the Russian royals can be simpler, we might at least consider listening to them. (2) I injected tsesareviches into discussion to offset the reasoning elsewhere here that Grand Dukes of Russia are named "consistently". Well, each tsesarevich is also a grand duke, so the tsesarevich title appears relevant to this discussion IMHO. Викидим (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion was similar and might be interesting. Викидим (talk) 21:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:30, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This does not seem to carry benefit in terms of recognition and makes it actually harder to identify the individual behind a very long word that carries almost no information. Title IMHO should not obscure the name, cf. Diana, Princess of Wales. What does the modern Russian encyclopedia do? Exactly what we are doing now, no title in the title (pun intended): [6]. What did the Russian encyclopedia and dictionary use while the tsars were still alive? Exactly our current variant: [7], [8]. What would a native Russian speaker use colloquially to identify Sophia Alekseyevna of Russia? Since she is fairly well known, the reference would be "царевна Софья" (tsarevna Sophia), just like "Princess Diana". What would a Russian historian use in the text of an encyclopedic article? Full version, indeed (царевна Софья Алексеевна). But the nobility titles in Russian practically never go into the article titles, thus my opposition. If consistency is important here (I personally do not think it is, as convenience IMHO trumps consistency), we should actually consider renaming Tsarevna Natalya Alexeyevna of Russia, etc. --Викидим (talk) 22:11, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Duchess is even longer and yet it's the standard for all the subsequent daughters of czars. What you're proposing would affect many more pages. Killuminator (talk) 14:00, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not propose any massive changes, my position is "convenience ... trumps consistency". However, if consistency - and associated mass changes - are requested, following the examples provided in Russian encyclopedias - and English ones (Sophia (regent of Russia)) might be worthwhile. Викидим (talk) 05:22, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The very well-known Princess Di is a special case. Is the same pattern used for more obscure or historical British royalty? —Michael Z. 15:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be a preference for "Princess" prefix for more modern times, but no uniformity (cf. Category:British princesses). For mediaeval times, there are no prefixes (cf. Category:English princesses), the Princesses Royal have a postfix (cf. Category:Princesses Royal), princess Sophia of Russia is in this latter category, BTW. In any case, the convenience in British monarchy articles appears to trump uniformity, as I have suggested. Викидим (talk) 03:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. No reason to add titles into the article names, which would violate both WP:CONCISE and the convention that we don't include such things unless it's never styled without it (e.g. Mother Teresa). If other pages say Tsarevna then the solution is to move those to more sensbile names, not to make the problem worse by adding these to their ranks. — Amakuru (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I see no value in adding an extra, little known word to an article title. It does not improve precision, recognisability or naturalness and is less concise. If consistency is the aim, then move the others tsarevnas to Praskovya Ivanovna of Russia and Yevdokia Alekseyevna of Russia. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:41, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 5 November 2023

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: page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 19:15, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Xenia Borisovna → Xenia Borisovna of Russia – Per WP:TITLECON. The territorial designation "of Russia" appears next to the name of every single tsarevna that we have an article on (see Category:Tsarevnas of Russia). There is no reason to single this one out. Keivan.f^Talk 23:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Reading Beans (talk) 11:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support for consistency and recognizability. SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.