Jump to content

Talk:Emperor of India

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jtdirl (talk | contribs) at 05:21, 11 April 2003 (replies, replies replies (yawn, yawn)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The title Emperor, Empress of India pretty much guarantees no one will link here just by wikifying text. How about putting the article at Empress of India and making a redirect to it from Emperor of India? -- Someone else 04:42 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

fair point. (Though considering how bad the article was, maybe having no links would be a very good thing!!!) Personally it doesn't bother me. But which one? The office was originally Empress of India.

This is a fairly common error, or at any rate a common cutting of a technical corner, which has led to much confusion in Australian constitutional discussion. A monarch does not "hold an office" (apart from other unrelated offices that might be there by coincidence). This blurs things, so people talking about presidents versus monarchs start arguing about who should hold an office of head of state - never realising that there are different kinds of things going on, so that they are effectively prejudging the point and building in their own conclusions. PML.

PML, please don't take this the wrong way. Its 6.15am. I can see dawn starting to break. I don't know why I decided to save this crappy article. I'm tired, hungry (and the computer is now playing Dooley Wilson singing As Time Goes By at me!) and fed up. Normally I would agree with you 100% and quote from something in the 500,000 words I have written heads of state in two books, or begin a detailed analysis. But right now, I am fed up, pissed off and for once in my life I DO NOT FRIGGING CARE WHETHER A MONARCH HOLDS AN OFFICE OR NOT!!! :-) There. God it off my chest. For one day, I will not eat, sleep and drink heads of state. (Oh Jaysus, the computer has now decided to play Bing Crosby singing Too Ra Loo Ra Loo Ra. That's it. I'm going to bed. better do the same thing yourself, PML.) And I might be in a better mood, able to quote constitutions by heart, know the intricacies of the French Fourth Republic's constitution compared to the Weimar Germany and the Commonwealth of Constitution Act, 1900, etc. STÓD/ÉÍRE 05:21 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

But there was only 1 empress and four emperors. So do you want to be accused of sexism by choosing the male title over the female, when the latter was there first? Or inaccuracy by choosing the less used female one? AAGH! STÓD/ÉÍRE

PS: Look below at the number of mistakes in only one paragraph.

The following line was removed:

The title was the brainchild of Prime Minister Sir Robert Arthur Talbot who was jealous of the Imperial titles of Queen Victoria's numerous cousins, and more importantly her daughter, the Queen Empress Alexandra of Germany.

  • Number 1: The prime minister being wrongly named above was known as the Marquis of Salisbury or Lord Salisbury. As that is the recognisable name, it should have been used.
  • Number 2: Are you sure you have the correct prime minister? Salisbury was not prime minister until later, if I remember correctly. That doesn't mean that he did not hold another post at the time and was PM later.
  • Number 3. There is no such person as the Queen Empress Alexandra of Germany. If you mean Victoria's daughter, the Princess Royal, who was briefly Empress of Germany and Queen of Prussia, her name was Victoria. Alexandra was the name of
  • Queen Victoria's daughter-in-law, the later Queen-Empress Alexandra of the United Kingdom
  • Empress (not queen) Alexandra, wife of Tsar Nicholas II.

Oh and the role Queen-Empress Victoria and later Queen-Empresses were completely different. The former was a monarch, the latter ones were merely Queens-Consort (ie, wives of monarchs), not monarchs themselves.

Oh, and please check the right titles and links for British royals. All the royals on the article page here should be linked to [[{name} of the United Kingdom]], not Great Britain (that stopped in 1801) not England (that stopped in 1707). STÓD/ÉÍRE 04:57 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)


Well, I think Empress of India is going to raise the thought of Queen Victoria for most people, and for those looking for others, having the (corrected) article at "Empress of India" can serve as a disambiguation page: sort of like a built-in "List of Emperors and Empresses of India". -- Someone else 05:05 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

I've gone by the numbers and made the page Emperor of India with a redirect at Empress, and fixed links. (What am I doing editing this shit at 6.12am. I started Pope Pius X an hour ago, saw this, laughed at its sheer awfulness and started a rewrite. DAWN IS DUE HERE IN FOURTEEN MINUTES, and I'm here doing this, with Frank Sinatra singing Ol' Man River on my eMac. (It was Guns'n'Roses an hour ago, Beethoven until 10 minutes ago. :-) STÓD/ÉÍRE 05:21 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)