As royalty and nobility often use titles rather than surnames, often change titles, and often have common names which are not unique, using a clear and consistent nomenclature can sometimes be difficult. This page contains a set of conventions for article titles that have been adopted through discussions between Wikipedia editors (see the talk page and its archives, and earlier, Wikipedia talk:History standards).
General policy on the naming of Wikipedia articles can be found at Wikipedia:Article titles. It is generally advisable to use the most common form of the name used in reliable sources in English ("common name" in the case of royalty and nobility may also include a person's title), but there are other things whch should be considered: ease of use, precision, concision, and consistency among article titles; and a system constraint: we cannot use the same title for two different articles, and therefore tend to avoid ambiguous titles.
Most of the conventions below are intended to apply to medieval and modern European rulers and nobility, since in these civilizations the same given names are often shared between countries, so some disambiguation is often required, and disambiguation by territory is convenient. The principles used here may also be useful in titling articles on Muslim rulers and nobility. Elsewhere, territorial designations are usually unnecessary in article titles.
For guidance on how to use titles and names within articles, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies).
For clerical titles (popes, cardinals, etc.), see Naming conventions (clergy).
Sovereigns
These following conventions apply to European monarchs since the fall of the Western Roman Empire (but not to the Byzantine Emperors), because they share much the same stock of names. For example, there are several kings and an emperor who are most commonly called Henry IV; their articles are titled Henry IV of England, Henry IV of France, and so on. The same holds for most kings; see James I, Robert I, and so on. The conventions on this page are also recommended, where applicable, for Muslim monarchs, who share their own common stock of names.
For guidance on East Asian monarchs, see Names and titles outside the West below. Roman Emperors are covered by Naming conventions (ancient Romans), and Byzantine Emperors by Naming conventions (Greek).
Monarchies which use a completely different namestock, such as Lithuania and that of the Merovingians, need not follow this convention; there is no disambiguation to pre-empt. Kings of a people, rather than a country or a nation, (for example, the late antique Germanic tribes) usually have no disambiguator, but "of the Goths" etc. should be added to the name if disambiguation is necessary.
For titles of articles on monarchs (with the exceptions referred to above):
- Generally, omit the titles "King", "Queen", "Emperor" and equivalent. However this does not apply to the Holy Roman Emperors and German Emperors (see point 5) or to rulers below the rank of king (point 7).
- If a monarch or prince is overwhelmingly known, in English, by a cognomen, it may be used. Examples: Alfred the Great, Charlemagne, Louis the Pious, Henry the Lion, Skanderbeg, etc. But there must be consensus among the reliable sources so strong that it would be surprising to omit the epithet; and the name must actually be unambiguous. For example, although Richard the Lionheart is often used, "Richard I" is not unusual, so he is at Richard I of England; if two kings of different countries are both known in English by the same cognomen (for example Louis the Great of Hungary and Louis the Great of France), do not use the epithet but disambiguate them by country (those two are at Louis I of Hungary and Louis XIV of France).
- Otherwise, kings, queens regnant and emperors and empresses regnant (with the exceptions mentioned above) normally have article titles in the form "{Monarch's first name and ordinal} of {Country}". Examples: Edward I of England; Alfonso XII of Spain; Henry I of France.
- This is an exception to the general rule of most common English name. Nevertheless, Monarch's first name and Country should both be the most common form used in current English works of general reference. Where this cannot be determined, use the conventional anglicized form of the name, as Henry above.
- Where there has only been one holder of a specific monarchical name in a state, the ordinal is used only when it was in official use. For example, Victoria of the United Kingdom, not Victoria I of the United Kingdom; Juan Carlos I of Spain, not Juan Carlos of Spain.
- The use of ordinals where there has been more than a single holder of a specific monarchical name is correct and appropriate. For example, William I of England, not William of England, as William II of England and William III of England hold the same monarchical name.
- Take care to use the correct name of the state at the time when a monarch reigned. So it is
- with British monarchs: monarchs of England only up to 1707 (e.g., Henry VIII of England), Great Britain from 1707–1800 (e.g., Anne of Great Britain), the United Kingdom since 1801 (e.g., George V of the United Kingdom);
- with German/Austrian monarchs: Holy Roman Emperors until 1806 (e.g., Henry V, Holy Roman Emperor), succeeded by rulers of Austria, then of Austria-Hungary from 1867. Dukes of Prussia from 1525 to 1618, then Electors of Brandenburg, then rulers of Prussia from 1701, and German Emperors from 1871 (e.g., William I, German Emperor). When in doubt, refer to List of German monarchs.
- Where a monarch has reigned over a number of states, use the most commonly associated ordinal and state. For example, Charles II of England, not Charles II of England, Scotland and Ireland; Philip II of Spain, not Philip I of Portugal. It is proper and often desirable to give the other states compensating prominence in the introduction of the article. Create redirects from other possible article titles.
- European monarchs whose rank is below that of King (e.g., Grand Dukes, Electors, Dukes, Princes), should be at the location "{Monarch's first name and ordinal}, {Title} of {Country}". Examples: Maximilian I, Elector of Bavaria, Jean, Grand Duke of Luxembourg. This is often usage, and avoids the question of when these Duchies became monarchies, as opposed to noble offices within the Kingdom of Germany/the Holy Roman Empire.
- Do not apply an ordinal in an article title for a pretender, i.e., someone who has not reigned. For example, use Louis Alphonse, Duke of Anjou, not Louis XX, for the legitimist pretender to the French throne. Such a person may however be referred to by a title, for example, Victor Emmanuel, Prince of Naples for the last Italian Crown Prince. But he should not have his article titled Victor Emmanuel IV even though Italian royalists call him so. (Such a name should redirect to the article.)
- Former or deposed monarchs should be referred to by their previous monarchical title with the exception of those who are still alive and are most commonly referred to by a non-monarchical title; all former or deposed monarchs should revert to their previous monarchical title upon death; for example, Constantine II of Greece not ex-King Constantine II or Constantine Glücksburg, Edward VIII of the United Kingdom not the Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor, but Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha not Simeon II of Bulgaria.
- No family or middle names, except where English speakers normally use them. The exception holds, for example, for Italian Renaissance dynasts. No cognomens (nicknames) in article titles, except when they are overwhelming usage as above.
- Make redirects from other plausible names that people might search for or link to, even if strictly incorrect. For example, Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom should have redirects from Elizabeth II of England, Elizabeth II of Great Britain, Elizabeth Windsor, Queen Elizabeth II etc.
These conventions will lead to most rulers and their consorts having no title in the name of their article. However, there is no Wikipedia convention that an article called Name of Place implies the subject is royal; Hildegard of Bingen is one example.
Consorts of sovereigns
Living royal consorts are referred to by their present name and title, as with Queen Sofia of Spain and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. The same applies to living former consorts, such as Queen Fabiola of Belgium (sometimes these will have a different title indicating their status as Queen Mother, Queen Dowager, or the like).
Deceased consorts are referred to by a name by which they are commonly known or (if recently deceased) are expected to become known. This will often differ from the name and title they held as consort or at death. Some examples are given below.
- Many consorts, particularly of England and France, are known in English as "{Name} of {Place}", like Margaret of Anjou, Isabeau of Bavaria and Mary of Teck, where {Place} is the country or House of origin. A title may be included, as with Prince George of Denmark.
- Consorts who are native subjects of their spouses are often known by their maiden name or the title they held in their own right, as with Catherine Parr, Victoria, Princess Royal (also known as Empress Frederick) and James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell. This pattern is also followed for the recently deceased British Queen Mother, whose article is titled Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon.
- Many other queens and empresses, particularly English princesses who marry abroad, are traditionally known by the name of their husband's country, as with Elizabeth of Bohemia.
- Sometimes a person may remain best known by the title they held as consort, as in Albert, Prince Consort.
- Sometimes the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, and can be used without any qualifier, as in Marie Antoinette.
- For Russian tsarinas, those of Russian origin have their forename and maiden surname as the article title, while those of foreign origin have their forename and adopted patronymic, with their original name and house in parentheses, as with Alexandra Feodorovna (Alix of Hesse).
- Note that the titles "Queen" and "Empress" are generally not included in article titles for deceased consorts, although the title of a consort of a lesser ruling prince (duke, grand duke, etc.) may be.
The diversity of these examples reflects the diversity of English usage. There is no agreed-upon general convention for deceased consorts; the chief proposal was to always use the maiden name, or house of origin, for such people, and that rule produces simply unrecognisable titles too often to be applied universally.
Royals with a substantive title
- If an individual holds a princely substantive title, use "{first name}, {title}". Examples: Charles, Prince of Wales, Anne, Princess Royal, Felipe, Prince of Asturias.
- When dealing with a Crown Prince(ss) (however not consort) of a state, use the form "{name}, Crown Prince(ss) of {state}" unless there is a clear formal title awarded to a prince which defines their status as crown prince (e.g., 'Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark', but 'Charles, Prince of Wales', 'Felipe, Prince of Asturias', etc)
- If a prince(ss) holds a substantive title that is not princely (a peerage, for instance), use "Prince(ss) {first name}, {title}". Examples: Prince Andrew, Duke of York and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex.
- Numerals are not generally used. Example: Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester, not "Prince Richard, 2nd Duke of Gloucester".
- If a prince(ss) holds a substantive title but is not widely known by it, use "Prince(ss) {first name} of ...". Examples: Princess Margarita of Bourbon-Parma and Prince Carl Philip of Sweden.
Other royals
For royalty other than monarchs:
- Use "Prince(ss) {first name} of ..." where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title, e.g., Prince William of Wales, Princess Beatrice of York, Prince Arthur of Connaught, etc.
- Where they have no substantive title, use the form "{title} {name} of {country}", e.g. Princess Irene of Greece. Use only the highest prefix title the person ever held and used (roughly before the 17th century, prince/ss would not be prefixed automatically).
- Do not use styles as part of a title of an article; e.g., Princess Irene of Greece not HRH Princess Irene of Greece.
- Do not use surnames in article titles for such persons. If royals have surnames, then this information should be mentioned in the first line of the article (but care should be taken, as many do not have surnames, and personal surnames may differ from the name of their Royal House). For details, see WP:Manual of Style (biographies)#Royal surnames.
- Base the article title on the most senior title a person held (this does not always apply in the case of consorts – see above).
British peerage
- Members of the hereditary Peerage (people who inherit their title or have received a title that they may pass down to their heirs e.g., William Wedgwood Benn, 1st Viscount Stansgate), such as a marquess, viscount, count, duke, earl, etc., as with royals have two names. For example Henry John Temple was also the 3rd Viscount Palmerston, hence typically referred to as "Lord Palmerston". Rule here is, "So-and-so, ordinal (if appropriate) title (of) place", and place redirects as you see fit. The sequence number is included since personal names are often duplicated (see Earl of Aberdeen.) Examples: Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, or Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston, with redirect Lord Palmerston, which allows both of his names to be included. EXCEPTIONS: When individuals received hereditary peerages after retiring from the post of Prime Minister (unless they are better known for their later career under an additional/alternative title), or for any other reason are known exclusively by their personal names, do not include the peerage dignity. Examples: Anthony Eden (not "Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon"), Bertrand Russell (not "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell") (but Henry Addington, 1st Viscount Sidmouth not "Henry Addington"). When individuals held more than one peerage and are best known by a title other than their highest one, use the interim one. Examples: Frederick John Robinson, 1st Viscount Goderich (not "Frederick John Robinson, 1st Earl of Ripon"), William Petty, 2nd Earl of Shelburne (not "William Petty, 1st Marquess of Lansdowne"). When individuals inherited or were created peers but are best known to history by a courtesy title use that. Examples: Frederick North, Lord North (not "Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford"), Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh (not "Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry"). Similarly, when one holder of a title is overwhelmingly the best known, he is sometimes given the colloquial form of the title (Alfred, Lord Tennyson). When a peer holds one or more other peerages of the same rank as his most senior peerage, use only the most senior peerage in the title. Example: Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond, not "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and 1st Duke of Lennox" or "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and Lennox". Single peerages with multiple parts should be used in full. Example: Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne, not "Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore".
- Life peers (ie, people who have peerages awarded exclusively for their lifetime but who neither inherit it nor pass it on to anyone else)¹ use the same standard as for hereditary peers: use the dignity in the title, unless the individual is exclusively referred to by personal name. For example: Alun Gwynne Jones, Baron Chalfont (not "Alun Gwynne Jones"), but Margaret Thatcher (not "Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher.")
- An honorific such as Lord Normanby may refer to any of the holders of the associated title, so can redirect to a page about the title itself.
- Baronets should generally have their article located at the simple name John Smith. But their hereditary titles, often held for a large part of their lives, should be noted at the beginning of the article in the format Sir John Smith, 17th Baronet. If they need to be disambiguated from another man of the same name, use the full style as the article name. John Smith, 17th Baronet should never be used with the postfix and without the prefix.
- Titles of Knighthood such as Sir and Dame usually need not be included in the article title: use personal name instead, e.g., Arthur Conan Doyle not Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, although "Sir" may be used in article titles as a disambiguator when a name is ambiguous and one of those who used it was knighted. (Make a redirect from the form with the title if it is well known, thus Sir Walter Raleigh redirects to Walter Raleigh; however, Walter Raleigh (professor) was also knighted.) The article itself should clarify details such as the full title, etc.
- Honorary knights (roughly, those admitted to a British order of knighthood but not from the Commonwealth) are not called Sir, but the appropriate post-nominal letters should be used in the first line of their biographical article, or the knighthood otherwise mentioned in the article. Thus, Bob Geldof is not "Sir Bob Geldof" in the title and is "Bob Geldof KBE (hon.)" in the text. Knights bachelor have no post-nominals.
- Courtesy titles (also referred to as an honorific prefix)² such as Lord or Lady differ from full titles because unlike full titles they are included as part of the personal name, often from birth. As such, they should be included in the article title if a person if universally recognised with it and their name is unrecognisable without it. For example, the late nineteenth century British politician Lord Frederick Cavendish was always known by that form of name, never simply Frederick Cavendish. Using the latter form would produce a name that would be unrecognisable to anyone searching for a page on Cavendish.
Footnotes:
¹ Life peers receive the title of Baron. As a rule of thumb when deciding if someone has a life peerage or hereditary peerage, if the title is marquess, viscount, duke, earl or anything but baron, the peerage is hereditary (there are a handful of exceptions for female peers in their own right). However, many barons are not life peers; hereditary baronies also exist. In general, if the peerage was created before 1958, and the holder is not a judge, it will be hereditary.
² A Courtesy title is an honorific prefix applied to the sons and daughters of hereditary peers. For example, Lady Diana Spencer's courtesy title came via her father's earldom. Lord John Russell was the second son of the Duke of Bedford. In many cases the holder of a courtesy title is known exclusively by its inclusion (which they may have had from birth) and unrecognisable without it, with the title treated as though it was in effect part of their name. That contrasts to full titles, which are not attached to the personal name, but exist separately.
Other cases
- In general, use the most commonly recognized English-language form of the name. Create redirections or disambiguations for other plausible links. A good way to find this form is to look up the subject in a few reliable English works of general reference. For example, Alexander von Humboldt is so called in the New Cambridge Modern History. Where this leaves a choice among common names, the simplest unambiguous one is often preferable. Where a person is known by their secondname, the title of the article should be (Second name) (Surname) and the text should begin (First name) (Second name) (Surname), e.g. Gordon Brown.
- Other names and titles, if any, should appear in the first paragraph of the article so they can be searched for.
- When dealing with nobles from outside the British Isles, be careful of English idiom for anglicized titles.
- British dukes normally have dukedoms, Continental dukes have duchies; but there are exceptions: Duchy of Cornwall is idiom.
- The British peer and his wife are Marquess and Marchioness; modern idiom is for Continental nobles to be Marquis and Marquise, even when the local title is Markgraf or Marchese
- British peers (and Scandinavian Jarls) are Earls; their Continental equivalents are Counts; the wives of British and Continental nobles alike are Countesses.
Names and titles outside the West
When there is no naming convention for a given set of names and titles, and no wide-spread problem of disambiguation, Wikipedia's general practice is to use the most common form in English as the article title.
- In East Asian names, look at common English usage to decide whether the western first-name last-name or the eastern last-name first-name order should be used. As a rule of thumb, Japanese names should usually be given in the western, Chinese and Korean names in the eastern order. A redirect from whatever order is not used, is almost always a good idea. Again, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (China-related articles), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean), Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles), Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Thailand-related articles).
- For China-related articles, please refer to Wikipedia:History standards for China-related articles.
- For Korea-related articles see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Korea-related articles) and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean)
- For Japan-related articles see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)
- For Thailand-related articles see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Thailand-related articles)
- For Burma-related articles see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Burmese)
- There is no explicit convention for Middle Eastern countries; but contemporary monarchs with Arabic names are often treated much as this guideline would suggest: Mohammed V of Morocco, Abdullah II of Jordan.