Talk:Edgar, King of England

Image available

This image, of a page from a 966 charter of King Edgar's, in which he confirms the conversion of New Minster, Winchester into a Benedictine monastery, might be of use here. Mike Christie (talk) 16:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I made a crop of that image for Anglo-Saxon dress: Image:New_Minster_Charter_966_detail_Edgar.jpg. Would that be a better main image, being contemporary? - PKM 23:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Update: I've uploaded a higher-resolution version of this image, and am updating the crops with higher-resolution versions as well. Dcoetzee 17:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Move Page

This article should be moved to Edgar of England. GoodDay (talk) 16:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC) Nevermind, I see it was just moved from there. Also, this is a pre-Norman Conquest monarch (I don't mind 'nicknames' on those monarchs). GoodDay (talk) 17:03, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Edgarobv.2.jpg

Image:Edgarobv.2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Birth date query

The birth date of c. 7 August 943 was inserted without a citation on 16 May 2008 by an unregistered user who has made a grand total of 3 edits to Wikipedia. It seems never to have been queried or challenged in the past almost seven years. The first thing that strikes me is that someone has confused 7/8 with 8/7 (Edgar's death date, 8 July).

I'm tempted to remove it, but will just just ask for a citation at this stage, pending the response. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 02:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

I've removed it. DrKay (talk) 09:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Birth year / age

If E. was born in 943 and made king in 959, he was 16 at the time and not 19 as the text says! Either one of the dates or the age is wrong. 91.65.175.94 (talk) 13:50, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Quite right. Corrected. Dudley Miles (talk) 13:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 19 August 2022

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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 17:17, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

---

Edgar the Peaceful → Edgar, King of England – The name Edgar the Peaceful is rarely if ever used in reliable sources, which should be the basis of article titles. I have checked the indexes of some 30 academic books on the period, and none have Edgar the Peaceful. One has Edgar Pacificus and one Edgar the Peaceable. Some show him as just "king" which is obviously not suitable as the title.

Eight show him as "Edgar, king of the English": Morris, The Anglo-Saxons; Barrow ed., Myth, Rulership, Church and Charters; Scragg ed., Edgar, king of the English; Charles-Edwards, Wales and the Britons; Marafioti, The King's Body; Naismith, Early Medieval Britain; Roach, Kingship and Consent; Wormald, Making of English Law.

Eleven show him as king of England: Winterbottom and Lapidge, The Early Lives of St Dunstan; Brooks ed., St Oswald; Crick ed., A Social History of England; Cooper, Monk-Bishops; Campbell, Anglo-Saxon State; Barker ed., St Wulfsige; Yorke, Wessex in the Early Middle Ages; Foot, Æthelstan; Hart, Danelaw; Higham and Ryan, The Anglo-Saxon World; (as Eadgar) Blair, The Church in Anglo-Saxon Society.

Either of these would be fine, but England is slightly more popular and simpler for readers. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:31, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Consistent with Wikipedia:Article titles and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). DrKay (talk) 12:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Question - in the style guide that u/DrKay linked to, it seems to recommend "Edgar of England"? Otherwise support. Fredlesaltique (talk) 13:08, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Nvm it should be "Edgar, King of England" (sorry can't edit comment on mobile) Fredlesaltique (talk) 13:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support; could probably have been a technical request tbh. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 13:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment. Not a single other pre-Conquest king has "King of England" in the title, currently. Is the nickname (or the alternative, 'Peaceable') really so bad that we have to introduce this inconsistency? Srnec (talk) 15:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

• The criterion for titles of monarchs in all periods is usage by reliable sources, not consistency. Thus we have Stephen, King of England and Æthelberht, King of Wessex, but not "king of" for most other kings because they were usually distinguished in other ways. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:40, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

• I don't think usage by reliable sources has anything to do with why we have "John, King of England" and "Henry III of England". I think WP:TITLECON and WP:NATURALDIS are relevant policies here. To me, rarely if ever is an exaggeration, although the more common form is 'peaceable'. When the titles of monarchs in a line of succession bounce around between conventions (numeral, nickname, comma-based dab, parenthetical dab, etc.), the reader is left scratching his head trying to figure out the reason. Srnec (talk) 21:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

You say that "rarely if ever" is an exaggeration, but you do not cite examples. As I said above, in a sample of 30 reliable sources, I did not find one which used Edgar the Peaceful. If readers come to the article through a popular source which does use the term, a redirect will take them to the correct article. Both peaceful and peaceable are translations of his byname pacificus, and as Marc Morris argues (Anglo-Saxons, p. 306), both translations are misleading as he was very quick to use violence when he was crossed; a better one would be peacemaker, someone who preserved the peace by savage punishments.

On your other point, it would be a very unusual reader who gave any thought to the titles in a line of succession, let alone scratched their head about it. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The nominator has shown that "Edgar the Peaceful" is an obscure name, something that WP:NATURALDIS specifically says should not be used. The style guide at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) says that "When there is no ordinal, the formats John of Bohemia and Joanna of Castile or Stephen, King of England and Anne, Queen of Great Britain are used." If someone now or in the future shows that "Edgar the Peaceful" is the name most commonly used in reliable sources then the title can be changed back, and I would support it. But the nominator has made a good case for why "Edgar, King of England" is best by citing reliable sources. Fredlesaltique (talk) 23:55, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The World Almanac uses Edgar the Peaceful (which is why I've known him this way since childhood). So no, not obscure. Srnec (talk) 02:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom rationale. Even if some sources like the World almanac mentioned above by Srnec do indeed use "Edgar the Peaceful", this does not compare to the huge amount of scholarly sources listed above which do not. If "Edgar the Peaceful" was indeed the most common and appropriate name, it would be blatantly more present than it is in relevant literature. Aza24 (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

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.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cielquiparle (talk) 12:52, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Fourteenth-century miniature of Edgar

• ... that King Edgar of England wanted to marry Wufhild, but she rejected him to become a nun instead? Source: Williams, Ann (2004). "Wulfhild [St Wulfhild] (d. after 996)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/49417. (subscription or UK public library membership required)
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Toys and games in ancient Rome

5x expanded by Dudley Miles (talk). Nominated by Unlimitedlead (talk) at 01:51, 26 January 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Edgar, King of England, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• New enough (an impressive effort), long & well-written enuf and seems balanced. It is undergoing a well-attended peer review. Earwig finds nothing. Pic ok to use (but link in the caption?) AGF on hook fact. Johnbod (talk) 18:17, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Unlimitedlead, but that is not quite right. She was not his cousin. He married her cousin. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:49, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for letting me know. I'll fix that. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:44, 26 January 2023 (UTC)