This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article should be renamed for this Judith is not called Martel. Since Wikipedia has allready an article over an other "Judith", I propose "Judith of Flanders" for this article. However I don't know how to change this article's name. Is there someone more knowledgable out there? johanthon 09:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
The names of queens and the like appears to be a particularly thorny aspect of Wikipedia naming conventions. However, there is just about a consensus to go for the maiden name in the absence of a specific reason to the contrary. The trouble is, what was her maiden name? Judit Martel was not a very good choice, since I am not aware that Martel was ever a surname rather than the cognomen of a specific ruler. Judith the Bald is theoretically possible, but I think most people would agree would be a bad choice. Judith of France is possible, but raises the issue of whether France existed as a nation or state in her day. I therefore propose Judith of the Franks as the least problematic title, the article should be moved there if nobody objects. If we refer to her by a married name, why not Judith of Wessex, since you could argue her time as queen of Wessex was more important than as countess of Flanders? PatGallacher 16:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
According to French article, Judith might have had a son with her second husband Ethelbald : Archibald ("Archibald le Jeune") BTH ( talk) 21:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
My deletion of the 'In fiction' section was reversed as a section of a subject's coverage in fiction can be encylopedic. However, WP:IPC makes clear that this refers to a sourced discussion which throws light on the subject (such as Henry II of England#Popular culture), not a list without discussion. I cannot find any significant sources which discuss the fiction. Dudley Miles ( talk) 00:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I think the point here is to discourage large sections containing a lot of trivia, not brief sections like this. PatGallacher ( talk) 01:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
WP:IPC states that such sections should detail a topic's impact on popular culture and be properly sourced, and this section does not meet either criterion. The two item list in Robert Curthose was deleted on the ground that it tells us nothing about Robert himself, and the same applies to this list. Dudley Miles ( talk) 19:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article should be renamed for this Judith is not called Martel. Since Wikipedia has allready an article over an other "Judith", I propose "Judith of Flanders" for this article. However I don't know how to change this article's name. Is there someone more knowledgable out there? johanthon 09:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
The names of queens and the like appears to be a particularly thorny aspect of Wikipedia naming conventions. However, there is just about a consensus to go for the maiden name in the absence of a specific reason to the contrary. The trouble is, what was her maiden name? Judit Martel was not a very good choice, since I am not aware that Martel was ever a surname rather than the cognomen of a specific ruler. Judith the Bald is theoretically possible, but I think most people would agree would be a bad choice. Judith of France is possible, but raises the issue of whether France existed as a nation or state in her day. I therefore propose Judith of the Franks as the least problematic title, the article should be moved there if nobody objects. If we refer to her by a married name, why not Judith of Wessex, since you could argue her time as queen of Wessex was more important than as countess of Flanders? PatGallacher 16:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
According to French article, Judith might have had a son with her second husband Ethelbald : Archibald ("Archibald le Jeune") BTH ( talk) 21:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
My deletion of the 'In fiction' section was reversed as a section of a subject's coverage in fiction can be encylopedic. However, WP:IPC makes clear that this refers to a sourced discussion which throws light on the subject (such as Henry II of England#Popular culture), not a list without discussion. I cannot find any significant sources which discuss the fiction. Dudley Miles ( talk) 00:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I think the point here is to discourage large sections containing a lot of trivia, not brief sections like this. PatGallacher ( talk) 01:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
WP:IPC states that such sections should detail a topic's impact on popular culture and be properly sourced, and this section does not meet either criterion. The two item list in Robert Curthose was deleted on the ground that it tells us nothing about Robert himself, and the same applies to this list. Dudley Miles ( talk) 19:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)