Talk:Władysław I Łokietek

Previous Discussions

Note: Previous discussions about this monarch can be seen at Talk:Vladislas I of Poland. --108.246.205.134

(talk) 20:14, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Name as it appears in reference works

This individual had several different names in different books. In preparation for a discussion about what will be the best title for the Wikipedia article, information is being collected below as to how third-party sources refer to this monarch. If you have access to a book that is not listed below, please feel free to add to the list. Thanks! --Elonka 17:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopedias

• Władysław I the Short, (1979 Encyclopedia Britannica)
• Wladyslaw I (bynames Wladyslaw the Short, Wladyslaw Lokietek), (online Britannica) [1]
• Ladislaus I, king of Poland (called Ladislaus the Short, (online Columbia) [2]
• Władysław I (called Łokietek ("the short") [3]

Dictionaries

• Wladyslaw I (Lokietek) (Sokol's Polish Biographical Dictionary)

Other academic reference works

• Władysław I Łokietek, Poland, an Illustrated History, Pogonowski, 2000
• Władysław I Łokietek 'the Short', A Concise History of Poland, Lukowski & Zawadzki, 2001
• Vladyslav the Short when introduced as territorial prince; "had himself crowned as Vladyslav I", which suggests the number is his choice. CamMedHist

Suggested move

Based on my own research in third-party works, and seeing how this monarch is referred to on other Wikipedia pages, I recommend that this article be moved to the title Wladyslaw I the Short. Is there support for this move? --Elonka 21:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I would say absolutely not. I wouldn't give up "the Elbow-High" for all the tea in China 173.120.120.192 (talk) 18:45, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Elonka, yes, this needs to move. He had a silly extra nickname, so what? We mention it but we don't use it as the title of the article. I think either Władysław I Łokietek or Władysław I Łokietek 'the Short'. --valereee (talk) 12:27, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Comment

Whatever may be the case in Polish, Elbow-high as an equivalent of "ell" is good etymology but bad English. The English ell is twice the length to the elbow, 45 inches, 114.3 cm. (The length of the Polish unit should be sourced.) Septentrionalis 22:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess this should be Ell-Tall (or maybe Ell-High, if it's supposed to evoke "yea-high"). Now it sounds like the bloke was so short that his head would fit under an average guy's elbow. If the translation was by Norman Davies, this wouldn't be his only blunder (only Polish, unfortunately). 37.47.234.110 (talk) 08:35, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

five provinces

The list of provinces into which Poland had been divided seems to be missing some semi-colons. It currently appears to list six or seven provinces, not the five that the previous sentence claims (or is that number wrong?) -Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 02:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

His actual height

The title of the article suggests we will find out how high the king was. All we find is the length of an ell. Does anyone know it, or even have a good guess? Snezzy 09:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• According to unverified sources about 130 cm Mieciu K 02:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Burger King

Ah, now we know where their mascot design came from. ;) They should have had a much shorter guy in the costume, though. MaxVolume (talk) 20:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Mark Glowacki

I removed a reference to "Mark Glowacki." I am assuming that this was vandalism.

Royal titles

Is there some reason why we have a very careful presentation of his titles before and after coronation - and they are exactly the same? If there is a reason for this, let's say so, otherwise it looks both pedantic and stupid. 173.120.120.192 (talk) 18:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)