Talk:Yi Ku

Title: HIH

There has been considerable debate over the use of titles at the beginning of the article like this, especially not bolded and italicised. It's surely even less appropriate, however, when the person concerned is – as the article makes clear – only a pretender, not in office. That makes its use a political statement, which Wikipedia shouldn't be making. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:21, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately Sissel111 has simply replaced the honorific without having the courtesy to discuss it here. I've removed it again, pending discussion. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:49, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If he continues to revert to his version without having the simple good manners to discuss the issue, I shall ask for the page to be protected. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:13, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry as I did such act. I didn't know well the rule here but he was already succeeded the 29th head of Korean imperial house, and he is obvious pretender in Korea. I think he must be called the His Imperial Highness. It must mark definitely. User:Sissel111

That his title would be "His Imperial Highness" can be mentioned in the article, but for Wikipedia to call him that would (I assume) be to take a stand on the legitimacy of his claim; our NPoV policy rule that out.

By the way, if you sign your messages using four tildes (~~~~), your name and the date of the message will be automatically provided. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:43, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

heirs

Does Prince Gu have any sons or daughters who can become his heirs? – Kaihsu 12:45, 2005 Jun 20 (UTC)

An adopted daughter; I don't know what her status is. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Alternative names

I should explain that I placed the alternative names in the summary because, when I was looking for details of his life and (more importantly) trying to confirm his death, I had no luck — until I realised that our article is one the very few that call him by this name. Most Internet sources seem to use Yih Ku, or other variants. Given that I'd been confused, i thought that other readers would be too, so I brought the alternative Romanisations into greater prominence. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Recent edits

I've just removed another in a series of copyvio images up-loaded by Sissel111 (talk · contribs). I've also removed the following paragraph, which I'm completely unable to understand:

"Lord Yi Won (李源 이원 i won) (b.1961), the only son of Prince Gap and also the cousin's son which the Prince Gu loved most to link for him was decided unofficially in a following head of Korean Imperial Household."

--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:16, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Sissel111 has removed the copyvio template from the image and replaced the image in the article. I've reverted this, and issued a warning. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:58, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Yi Won?

Does anyone know who this is? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:42, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

See Yi Won. -- Visviva 03:48, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:07, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Title

Per the naming conventions for (cough) monarchs, shouldn't this be at Yi Gu? -- Visviva 03:48, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Name table.

Should the pretended title 황태손 be included here? It is verifiable and surely relevant to an article about someone whose lone notable attribute was his claim to the Joseon line. The content was removed by an anon, but I have restored it for now. -- Visviva 13:53, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

I've added "claimed" as an attempt at compromise; is that OK? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:16, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Requested move: Yi Ku

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Page moved to Yi Gu. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:46, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Gu, Prince Imperial Hoeun → Yi Ku – Relisting. -GTBacchus^(talk) 04:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)He is "Yi Ku" to the Associated Press, to The Telegraph, to the Los Angeles Times, to the Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Korea, and to Britannica. JoongAng Ilbo calls him "Yi Gu", as does Chosun Ilbo. Yonhap says "Lee Ku". I don't see anyone else calling him a "prince imperial hoeun". "Yi Ku" is already a redirect to this page. Kauffner (talk) 07:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

• Support per the comprehensive nomination which shows that "Yi Ku" is the common name. Jenks24 (talk) 11:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Hmm, should have looked a bit more closely at first. I agree that Yi Gu is more popular on google, but only slightly. Really either Yi Ku or Yi Gu seem appropriate and reasonable to me. Jenks24 (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
• Comment. Search engine results favour Yi Gu as the common name. Nightw 09:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
• Relisting discussion for comment on Yi Ku vs. Yi Gu as proposed titles. -GTBacchus^(talk) 04:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
• Support. A Google search on {imperial prince Korea "Yi Ku"} yields 313 genuine hits; {imperial prince Korea "Yi Gu"} yields 431. Similar pairs of searches show a similar ratio. Noetica^Tea? 05:52, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
• Move to Yi Gu since that doesn't require a change in spelling and because this seems to be the marginally more common spelling anyway. Nightw 19:18, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine with either "Yi Ku" or "Yi Gu". But if anyone cares, it's 9 post-1990 Google Book results for "Yi Ku", compared to 5 for "Yi Gu". In the news archive, it's 9 for "Yi Ku," 8 for "Yi Gu". While I have to wonder how this subject got into Britannica, he is there and he has an entry entitled "Yi Ku". So that should decide it. "Yi Ku" is the traditional McCune–Reischauer system. MCT spelling is "I Gu". "Yi Gu" is some kind of compromise spelling. There is a WP:Naming_conventions_(Korean) about this stuff. Kauffner (talk) 12:10, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move?

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Flimsy rationale not related to WP:AT (as is urged in many places). No support and no consensus, and already relisted once in the hope of getting it. We move on. Please also note that these three moves could and should have been raised and discussed as one multi move. Andrewa (talk) 16:29, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

---

• Yi Gu → Prince Hoeun – Royal name instead of personal name. --Relisted. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:30, 20 April 2014 (UTC) Article editor (talk) 00:41, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. It is the nominator's responsibility to show that someone is actually using the proposed title. As shown in the previous RM, Britannica and other sources call him by the current title or by a minor variation of it. The proposed title was something his family came up with after her died. It is not recognized by the Korean government or any other legal authority. One leg at a time (talk) 19:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.