This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What's going on here? I can't find the discussion on CFD of the deletion of Category:Plantagenet. What's the story here?
Also, House of Anjou isn't a specific enough category. After the Plantagenet Kings of England lost control of Anjou, there were two separate Capetian Houses of Anjou. john k 02:08, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Around 7 Oct 2005, all persons previously classified as "Plantagenet" were moved into the classification "House of Anjou", muddling the contents a bit. Since there is a British Angevin line, and two French royal lines that bear the name House of Anjou, a more specific classification system is needed. I propose something like the following, but would welcome suggestions on naming of categories before starting to institute them . - Nunh-huh 17:10, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Since
John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster was the son-in-law of
Henry of Grosmont, 1st Duke of Lancaster, the two Houses of Lancaster are not unrelated. Perhaps they should go to the same category. The distinction should be made at the introduction of the category.
The Beauforts and Somersets could form subcategories of their own. Lets say "Category:Beaufort family" and "Category:Somerset family" after the similarly named "Category:Bach family", "Category:Brontë family", etc. The introduction should clearly state who was the "founder" of the family and what was his relation to the ancestral family. However "illegitimate" should be used instead of "bastard".
However the "Category:House of Anjou" name remains a problem. As it currently stands it may as well include the half-siblings of Geoffrey V, Count of Anjou: Baldwin III of Jerusalem and Amalric I of Jerusalem and the descedants of the later. They are also "House of Anjou" Royals after all. User:Dimadick
This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What's going on here? I can't find the discussion on CFD of the deletion of Category:Plantagenet. What's the story here?
Also, House of Anjou isn't a specific enough category. After the Plantagenet Kings of England lost control of Anjou, there were two separate Capetian Houses of Anjou. john k 02:08, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Around 7 Oct 2005, all persons previously classified as "Plantagenet" were moved into the classification "House of Anjou", muddling the contents a bit. Since there is a British Angevin line, and two French royal lines that bear the name House of Anjou, a more specific classification system is needed. I propose something like the following, but would welcome suggestions on naming of categories before starting to institute them . - Nunh-huh 17:10, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Since
John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster was the son-in-law of
Henry of Grosmont, 1st Duke of Lancaster, the two Houses of Lancaster are not unrelated. Perhaps they should go to the same category. The distinction should be made at the introduction of the category.
The Beauforts and Somersets could form subcategories of their own. Lets say "Category:Beaufort family" and "Category:Somerset family" after the similarly named "Category:Bach family", "Category:Brontë family", etc. The introduction should clearly state who was the "founder" of the family and what was his relation to the ancestral family. However "illegitimate" should be used instead of "bastard".
However the "Category:House of Anjou" name remains a problem. As it currently stands it may as well include the half-siblings of Geoffrey V, Count of Anjou: Baldwin III of Jerusalem and Amalric I of Jerusalem and the descedants of the later. They are also "House of Anjou" Royals after all. User:Dimadick