Talk:Vasily II of Moscow

Basil

I have moved this article from Vasili II of Russia, chiefly because this Prince never claimed to rule Russia; his son did. In the process, I have changed his name to Basil, partly to use English, and partly to avoid the several different ways to transliterate Vasili/Vasily/Vasilly/Vasiliy. I have left his cousin unanglicized, largely so the reader can tell them apart.

I hope I am correct in reading the reference to "maternal grandfather" as referring to Vytautas' support of Basil II. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Irpen and others, calm down a bit. of Russia? See [1], [2], [3] Colchicum 22:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Please calm down yourself and express your ideas in a clear and intelligible form. --Irpen 23:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 6 May 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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 05:20, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

---

Vasily II of Moscow → Vasily II – Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Currently, Vasily II and Vasili II redirect here. Mellk (talk) 23:09, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:NCROY. The modifiers should only be left off for very famous or unambiguous cases where COMMONNAME applies - the default should be to include the country, these rulers are too obscure in English to qualify for a COMMONNAME argument. SnowFire (talk) 04:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per SnowFire. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 10:25, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
• Neutral for now I regard SnowFire's argument these rulers are too obscure in English to qualify for a COMMONNAME argument as invalid; personal ignorance is not an excuse. But, unlike with Vasily III of Moscow (currently also running an RM to Vasily III, which I support), "Vasily II" is less clear. Most sources do refer to Vasily II of Moscow, but I see several sources writing Vasily II when they mean patriarch Basil II of Bulgaria, patriarch Basil II of Constantinople or emperor Basil II. Tellingly, the last one has the following template at the top:

For the Muscovite ruler, see Vasily II of Moscow. For the Patriarch of Constantinople, see Basil II of Constantinople.

This shows that there is some confusion between (emperor) "Basil II" and "Vasily II" (of Moscow). But that confusion is mostly about whether "Basil II" can also refer to the Muscovite prince (apparently it can; the redirect Basil II of Muscovy has also existed since 2007), not whether "Vasily II" can also refer to the Byzantine emperor. "emperor vasily II" does give some results on Google Books and Google Scholar, although it's few. I think this justifies redirecting Vasily II to Vasily II of Moscow, but whether renaming is a good idea I'm not sure. I would certainly recommend a Template:For multi to the other three people at the top, and I'm not sure if that would make the article prettier. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:12, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

PS: I might add that the vast majority of results I got for "Vasily II" were followed or preceded by the words Moscow, Muscovy, Muscovite, or less commonly Russia, Russian. Even though few other people are named "Vasily II" in English literature, English authors do apparently feel the need to identify him with such toponyms to be clear with their readers. This is a tacit COMMONNAME argument against just "Vasily II", although it may not necessarily be decisive yet. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:24, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

PPS: Basili II redirects to List of heads of the Georgian Orthodox Church. Funnily enough, there is no "Basili I", but there is a Vasili I (434–436). The list is remarkably inconsistent, with Basili II (914–930), Basili III (Karichisdze) (1090–1100), but Basil IV (1206–1208), Basil V (1330–1350), and Basil VI (1517–1528), and finally a Metropolitan Jonah (Vasilevsky) (1821–1834). Given such variety in spelling for lots of different kinds of people in different functions in different times and places and different languages, I'm now leaning towards oppose. We might even consider making the redirects disambiguation pages, as the primary topic may not be that obvious in many cases. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense. I think for Vasily I and Vasily II we can leave it at as it is. Mellk (talk) 21:07, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

@Mellk Looks like all three RMs are going to result in of Moscow. I was really open to Vasily II and especially Vasily III, but it looks like WP:NCROY is taken pretty seriously by the community. For consistency's sake, it is probably for the better to go for of Moscow in all three cases. While we're at it, we're also adopting the spelling Vasily instead of the apparently obsolete Vasili as the new standard transcription. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Would it not be best practice to start a new RM rather than making a different type of move right after a RM has finished? Mellk (talk) 22:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean? I'm not suggesting any new moves. I'm just observing that that Vasily will be the standard spelling in all three titles once these RMs are over, and that this is a good thing. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:53, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

• Strong oppose per WP:NCROY. Walrasiad (talk) 20:46, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
• Comment. My mistake. See also Talk:Vasili III of Russia#Requested move 6 May 2023 and Talk:Vasily I of Moscow#Requested move 6 May 2023. Mellk (talk) 21:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose per WP:NCROY and WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. The primary redirect is sufficient. Estar8806 (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2023 (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.