This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Royalty and Nobility This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance). Middle Ages Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Czech Republic This article is within the scope of WikiProject Czech Republic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Czech Republic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Czech RepublicWikipedia:WikiProject Czech RepublicTemplate:WikiProject Czech RepublicCzech Republic articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

the use of a leading comma (a comman out in front) to indicate another name is not a good idea in an encylopedia aimed at a general reader. Not many people are familiar with that convention. On the point of multiple names (especially when they're just translations into other languages), it might be best to simply list them at the BOTTOM of the entry where the long list of names doesn't interfere with the prose of the article. Remember, this is supposed to be an encyclopedia.

Ok, that is a good idea user:H.J.

Anyone have any opinions on what the proper naming conventions for Boleslav I, Boleslav II, and Boleslav III should be? The Naming Conventions Project indicates that the most commonly recognized English-language form of the name should be used- this would presumably be the Latin Boleslaus. It was suggested at Guidelines for the spelling of names of Polish rulers that pre-royal names should be local in name while royal names should be English/Latin in name, but I do not know if that was ever accepted.

I personally prefer "Boleslaus I the Cruel ( Czech: Boleslav I. Ukrutný)" with the article name Boleslaus I of Bohemia, but want to see what other people think before I propose a move. Olessi 21:31, 20 September 2005 (UTC) reply

This article states Boleslav "arranged for his sister Doubravka to marry the Piast prince Mieszko I in 965". However other sources, including the articles on his daughter, Doubravka, and Mieszko I say that Boleslav I was the father, not brother, of Doubravka (also called Dobrawa) who married Mieszko I in 965.

One Boleslav (I) was her father, the other one Boleslav (II) was her brother. Where is the problem? There were mane bearers of that name - Boleslav. -- Franta Oashi ( talk) 02:51, 9 February 2015 (UTC) reply

"...presumably consisting of border raids ... between Boleslav on one side and the margrave of the Ostmark on the other, reached its conclusion in 950 when Boleslav signed a peace..." -- however: the Ostmark / Austrian March wasn't created until 955 (see History of Austria). So who was this margrave of the Ostmark? Chl 19:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Perhaps the Saxon Eastern March. The Ostarrichi-to-be, can be more precisely referred to as the Bavarian Eastern March. -- Karel Kocourek 21:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Both 967 and 972 are given as death dates; any firm information?; no help from LC-- FeanorStar7 21:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC) reply

The second illustration picture ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boleslav_of_Bohemia_and_Jewish_slave_trader.jpg) is incorrectly pasted to the article about Boleslaus I. In fact it depicts St. Vojtěch/Adalbert while trying to persuade the duke Boleslaus II, son of Boleslaus I ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boleslaus_II,_Duke_of_Bohemia) not to allow selling christian slaves to pagan lands. By the way, this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boleslav-II-Bohemian.jpg) is a pen drawing after the disputed picture.

If there is desirable to append more than one illustration picture, than it could be this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ermordung_Wenzels.jpg This is undoubtedly the most contemporaneous depiction of Boleslaus I, although as a very young man. Naturally it would need some commentary for the reader, to help them distinguish between the two dukes. Karel Kocourek 21:11, 30 October 2012 (UTC) reply