Talk:Alfred the Great

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

May I respectfully request that something be done about the Category "UK Monarchs"? It is just plain wrong to have someone who died 900 years before the creation of the United Kingdom(and who was not even king of a united England included in this Category. I have moaned about this elsewhere, and if able to edit the Category page I would do so. The British Royalty website has the monarchs listed under "England" up to the Stuarts and UK for Stuarts to the present.

The articles I am doing on the medieval kings I am categorising as Monarchs of England. May I suggest that there be three categories: Anglo-Saxon, England and UK; each cross linked with the others? I intend doing a list of the Kings of the Scots. That will make even more of a mockery of the "UK' tag before 1603. I am going to copy this onto the Category page. Sorry to be a boor, but.....AlanE 19:39, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

  • This is an encyclopedia, therefore your personal opinion, or mine, means nothing. These [1] & [2] seem to indicate he was King of England, as the term is known now. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 19:48, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
TK, I think AlanE is referring to the fact that Alfred the Great could not have been a UK Monarch, since the United Kingdom wasn't formed until ~900 years after his reign. He would fall under the "Anglo-Saxon Monarchs" category suggested above. --Colest 20:03, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Yes, I understand. However this is an encyclopedia, and the category is assigned to make searching by users who might not be that well versed in history. Does that help further explain? :-) --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 20:36, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

11 June 2007 (EDT)

TK, I think AlanE is referring to the fact that Alfred the Great could not have been a UK Monarch, since the United Kingdom wasn't formed until ~900 years after his reign. He would fall under the "Anglo-Saxon Monarchs" category suggested above. --Colest 20:03, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Thank you, Colest. TK, this is not an opinion thing - it is a matter of historical accuracy. There is no encyclopedia or reference book I have ever read that has ever had a pre-Stuart monarch in the same context as "UK". It's like listing a seventeenth century colonial governor of one of the Thirteen States under "US Governors". Whoops...I meant Colonies, not States

I recently added to the UK Monarchs page the kings and queens of England from 1066 to 1603. Might I suggest that that page be extended to include the Anglo-Saxon kings (there are three lines of them I think) and the Scottish monarchs. The page could be "British Royalty", with redirects going to it. It would have the lists with dates etc. I am willing to spend some time on this over the next few days. I do know my way around this subject. But it isn't about me. Its about the veracity of CP.AlanE 20:47, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

  • I am willing to discuss this with you AlanE. You can email me through CP mail, use my AIM, or post on my talk page, or link me to the discussion page where you want to work. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 21:54, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

ThanksTK. I have just posted on the Category Uk Monarchs discussion page. I will get back to you....but I now have family commitments. (It's early afternoon, here).AlanE 23:03, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Oh! Yes! I should have said this before anything else. I enjoyed the Article. AlanE 23:06, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

I understood that the illnes Alfred had was Crohn's Disease. But other Anglo Saxon Kings could be described as not "flawed"- I would suggest Ethelbert, Ethelred I (i.e. not the Unready, Edward the Elder, Athelstan, Edmund the Magnificent, Eadred and Edmund Ironsides. The rest were, with the possible exception of Edwy the Fair.Ceorlacyng 15:59, 2 December 2007 (EST)