Talk:Charles Napier (Royal Navy officer)

Untitled

Should this not be moved to Charles Napier (admiral)? Brendandh 16:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't see the point. Obviously he wasn't an admiral all his career, and many of his exploits were performed before he attained that rank. The more general 'Naval officer' seems appropriate to me.Cenedi 21:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Isn't it normal in Bio articles to give a dead subject his more senior title? E.g. No King or Queen were Kings and Queens for all their careers either, yet are always referred to as such. This article should at least be entitled Sir Charles Napier, so by dissociating him from Charles James Napier, (also a Knight) his cousin and General officer in the army. Although I have done it myself in earlier articles, it seems that the use of information in parentheses in the title, should be reserved for the main article or info on a disambig page. Brendandh 00:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

It is unusual for the name of an article to include an honorific or title, such as "Sir", just as it would be unusual for the name of an article to include "King" or "Queen" - compare Henry VIII of England and Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom. Disambiguation of the various Charles Napiers by parenthesis is quite usual, in my experience, although I am agnostic about "(naval officer)" or "(admiral)".

What does the Manual of Style say? -- ALoan (Talk) 11:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't feel strongly about any of this: I'm just trying to think in terms of someone looking for further information who could have encountered Napier in any one of several contexts, including Napoleonic Wars, War of 1812, Syrian War etc - in none of which he was an Admiral, but the context would be naval. He was, in fact, "Charles John Napier", but the middle name is very seldom cited.Cenedi 17:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, ideally, we would have redirects, so Admiral Charles Napier and Captain Charles Napier would all come here too. I did not realise that he has a middle name: he should probably be at Charles John Napier, to distinguish him from General Charles James Napier. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Charles Napier (Royal Navy officer)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

With appropriate citations, could become a B-class artilce pretty easily. Coemgenus 15:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 15:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 11:20, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Charles Napier (Royal Navy officer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041114162905/http://www.memorials.inportsmouth.co.uk:80/city-centre/napier.htm to http://www.memorials.inportsmouth.co.uk/city-centre/napier.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090925171910/http://www.catherington.net:80/blackcharlie.html to http://www.catherington.net/blackcharlie.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:52, 20 November 2016 (UTC)