Hi Larry, I started preparing this 3-4 weeks ago, and this format was at the time the suggested replacement for subpages. (you might even have suggested it yourself at some stage :-) )- clasqm
Heh, but subpages are evil :-) Acually, in this instance, I think "Emperor X of Japan" (or even "Emperor X" if there are no name collisions) would be nicer, since all other monarchs seems to get their own pages (as well as all other historical persons). I'll pitch in and help you convert the references if you'd like. --Anders Törlind
I converted them to "Emperor X of Japan" style (it only took a couple of minutes in Emacs). But I think "Emperor X" would be better, since collisions with non-Japanese emperors seem unlikely. We need to decide this before too many articles on individual emperors get written. --Zundark, 2001 Nov 22
Thanks, Zundark - I fixed the half-dozen empresses that you gave a posthumous sex change :-). I think "Emperor X of Japan" might have advantages when it comes to search engines and so on, though - clasqm
I think this "Emperor X of Japan" business is kind of silly. Why should the Gemmei article not be at Gemmei? rather than Empress Gemmei of Japan, if there is no other use of that word. Articles about people should be titled with either their names [Mary Stuart]? or the most common usage [Mary, Queen of Scots]?.