Talk:Mary I

"Mary 1" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Mary 1 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 August 20 § Mary 1 until a consensus is reached. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 12:17, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Removal of musical content concerning Mary's funeral.

After external discussion and research, as well as inspect of one of three sources, I realised there was source redundancy while other texts are speculative about Tallis' presence and I conflated all three. This is poor link verification. Please take admin action if necessary as this is not a single error. Eurostarguage (talk) 17:50, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Historical question

The lead states that he (Edward) "attempted to remove Mary from the line of succession because he supposed, correctly, that she would reverse the Protestant reforms that had taken place during his reign." Is there any evidence that he, being under the age of 18, acted on his own, or was this actually the actions of the regent John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland and therefore attributed to him? -- Otr500 (talk) 02:15, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

This is more thoroughly covered in the relevant sections of Edward VI. DrKay (talk) 07:40, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 7 February 2026

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Mary I of England → Mary I – Renominating, after a previous discussion in January 2024 produced no consensus. Going by pageviews, she appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The other monarchs called Mary I are either known primarily without numerals, called by a foreign-language name, or an obscure 13th-century countess. Векочел (talk) 18:36, 7 February 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 07:40, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Military history, WikiProject Royalty and Nobility, WikiProject Catholicism, WikiProject Anglicanism, WikiProject English Royalty, WikiProject Women's History, and WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard have been notified of this discussion. Векочел (talk) 18:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

• Support. She is the primary topic by usage. If one looks at web searches, such as https://www.google.com/search?q=%22mary+I%22+-wikipedia, the first 10 pages of ghits all relate to this woman [I didn't bother looking beyond the first 100 hits]. DrKay (talk) 18:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support the English one has 107,406 views compared with only 8,386 for the Burgundy one, 3,852 for the Hungary one, 156 for the Menteith one and 7,931[] for Maria. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:00, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support per above. Mellk (talk) 21:22, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose. This is not even the most viewed Mary I on Wikipedia. That would be Mary, Queen of Scots. Restore the dab page to primary as it was for over a decade. Srnec (talk) 21:25, 9 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support per nom, WP:NCROY and WP:PTOPIC. Although Mary, Queen of Scots, was technically also known as Mary I, in common usage Mary I almost exclusively refers to the queen of England. The redirect Mary I has pointed here already for 9 years now, so this is just moving the page to the base name.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:08, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose, Mary, Queen of Scots is as significant if not more and had the same name. Hatnotes should suffice, or create DAB for both at Mary I.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:12, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

  Mary, Queen of Scots is virtually never referred to as "Mary I". A Google search, Scholar search or analysis of book sources will quickly reveal that. Primary topics aren't just about what's overall the most significant, they're also about what the specific title in question actually refers to.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:55, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

  And common name isn't just about finding the shortest possible title for which the article is the primary topic. In fact, the opposite is normally the case for biographical articles. We prefer full names regardless. E.g. Johann Sebastian Bach, not Bach. Although name-and-numeral combinations are not the exact same thing, the same principal applies. The slightly longer title is better for the reader. Just as a first name helps the reader see that, e.g., Picasso is a last name, so the country helps the reader see what 'the first' is in reference to. Srnec (talk) 04:30, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

  The distinction is in how the respective topics are predominantly referred in reliable sources. —В²C ☎ 12:50, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  Bach is called Bach predominantly, not Johann Sebastian Bach. No special exception for monarchs is being sought. The numeral is integrally related to the kingdom. Just as we normally do not treat surnames as things that float freely, so we should not treat name-numeral combos as things that float freely. The numeral is like a conjunction connecting name and territory. The main reason you can sometimes dispense with the latter is that the name is unique (i.e. Ramesses or Clovis). Srnec (talk) 21:05, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

  Nope. See Johan Sebastian Bach, Mary I and Mary, Queen of Scotland in Brittanica. —В²C ☎ 11:15, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

  What do the titles at Britannica have to do with how the respective topics are predominantly referred in reliable sources? In any case, Britannica treats Mary I the same way it treats Henry IV, Henry IV and Henry IV: Name and numeral at the top, title below. Only the URL is 'undisambiguated' in the former case, but since that need not have her name in it at all it is irrelevant. Srnec (talk) 15:02, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

  Look at how each is referred in the opening sentence of each article. That’s what matters. And Bach’s Britannica “title below” is “German composer”. So what? Other than these “titles below” are good suggestions for parenthetical disambiguation, when needed. Not here.

  If you can’t see that “Mary I” is this topic’s COMMONNAME and for which she’s PRIMARY, I’m truly sorry. I’ve tried to help, but I give up. Luckily, only a small minority, also unable to articulate a persuasive policy-based argument to retain the current title, is with you. —В²C ☎ 17:00, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

• Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Rreagan007 (talk) 03:17, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support: I again am inclined to protest the changing of article titles in these situations, but seeing as precedent has already been established and other editors have presented evidence that "Mary I" primarily refers to Mary Tudor, I will support the move. Unlimitedlead (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support: WP:NCROY tells us that the "of [territory]" disambiguation is not needed for monarchs whose regnal name is unambiguous or primary topic. The English queen has been the primary topic at Mary I (disambiguation) for many years; Mary, Queen of Scots is very rarely known as Mary I. Rosbif73 (talk) 16:29, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support, per Amakuru, PRIMARYTOPIC and COMMONNAME, but also CONCISION. Leaving the title as is misleads readers into thinking this person is not most commonly known as Mary I. That’s just irresponsible. —В²C ☎ 12:50, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  People understand without being told that Donald Trump can be shortened to Trump when understood. The same applies here. Mary I, for that matter, will usually be called just Mary. Srnec (talk) 21:05, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

  No, it’s not the same. Most pieces about them in reliable sources, at least initially, reference them as “Donald Trump” and “Mary I”, respectively. See Mary I in Brittanica. Links to the Donald Trump article there are blocked from here. —В²C ☎ 10:54, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

  Donald Trump was Donald Trump from birth, but Mary I only became such at her accession. "Mary I" is only marginally more popular than "Mary Tudor" in ngrams. Mary Tudor is in the title of five books under "Sources" and seven books under "Further reading", while Mary I is in only one in each (and one of those, Mary I: England's Catholic Queen, is hardly evidence against the current title of this article). Nobody has ever argued that the specific string of words "Mary I of England" has special status any more than one or the other of "Johann Sebastian Bach" or "J. S. Bach" is more correct. The logic of the longer title in each case is the same. Srnec (talk) 15:02, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Jessintime (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support per Amakuru and the general consensus here ~ Lindsay^Hello 12:22, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support - Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Regards, An emperor ✖ 19:27, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support - she is the most widely known person in English that bears the name Mary I. Like everyone else in the discussion said, Mary, Queen of Scots is not widely known as Mary I. Interstellarity (talk) 21:23, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.