Talk:Family of Gediminas

GA pass
This is a very detailed article - nice work! You have managed to convey the particulars of the family along with the larger historical narrative. I think that perhaps a bit more historical context would help the less informed reader (like myself). A few, small suggestions for improvement:


 * More recent research indicates that their common ancestor may have been Skalmantas - I'm not sure what you mean here.


 * Can't help with this - the phrase "Homer's works were not written by Homer, but by another writer of the same name" occurred to me here, and thoughts became hopelessly tangled. It's like "don't think of the word polar bear".


 * Scholarly opinion had long considered Fiodor to be a Rurikid because of his Christian name. In 1916, though, a list of property belonging to Feofil, a deceased metropolitan, and compiled in the 1330s was published; among the items were two silver cups gifted by "Fiodor, brother of Gediminas".[7] - It is not clear to me what this is proving.


 * Changed to "...a Rurikid, rather than a Lithuanian, because..."


 * Better. Awadewit | talk


 * However, S. C. Rowell argues that Gediminas' wife was a local pagan duchess, on the grounds that his marriage to a Polish or Ruthenian princess would have been noted in other contemporary sources, - Tell readers why they should trust Rowell - is s/he a historian?


 * Yes, a historian at Magdalene College, Cambridge - see . Do you think his/her academic affiliation needs to be mentioned, or is just historian enough?


 * I think historian is sufficient. Awadewit | talk


 * I would suggest staggering the images on the left- and right-hand side of the page to make the page more aesthetically pleasing.


 * I would add the birth and death dates of each member of the family to the family tree.

A well-written and informative article. A pleasure to read. Awadewit | talk  02:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your review and input, Novickas 11:30, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This article definitely ready for WP:FAC. M.K. 16:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I couldn't offer more suggestions! Awadewit | talk  23:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Question
Great, the Skalmantas/Homer earworm is gone. About Elzbieta and her second name. Does this mean that Elzbieta was her original name and Danute her baptismal name? Both names sound Christian. Novickas 12:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * He he re Skalmantas. Re Elzbieta: her pagan name is unknown. But she is known by two names in historiography - Elzbieta and Danute. Both of these names are Christian. There is (probably very confusing) discussion why she has a double name: the second name was recorded by Dlugosz and populiarized form there. Where did he get it from is a mystery. Renata 13:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Bot suggestions
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Person, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
 * Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Guide to layout.[?]
 * There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
 * it has been
 * might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?]
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

"However" and "went on to ..."
This is the first article I've seen, at the point I've edited to, where the use of "went on to" and "however" are correct and needed. I'm WAY impressed. --Preston McConkie (talk • contribs) 00:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your copyedits. I'm sorry you don't like semicolons; to my mind, the pause is especially useful while the reader is slogging through an article full of unfamiliar names and events (In 1237 he married his daughter Anna Vodkatonika to Prince Ivan Stravinsky Stravor, son of King Igor the Ignoble of Wachovia, who subsequently revoked Jus prima noctis in the realms of...) MS Word seems to have changed its collective mind about semicolons. Used to be when you ran a grammar check it would come to a full stop and announce "Semicolon usage - Ignore, continue?". However, it has since gone on to accept them without comment. Pls carry on if you are so inclined (your earlier note indicated you were stopping). Novickas (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Why do we have two separate articles about the same topic -- this one and Gediminids? &mdash; Kpalion(talk) 01:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Because it's not the same topic. This one is about immediate family of Gediminas (it's quite impossible to read a good history book without figuring out which son/daughter did what). Gediminids is about the whole 300-year dynasty. This article is sub-article of Gediminids. Renata (talk) 03:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

This article is actually about the near-contemporary family of Gediminas and not about what the technical language understands with the term House of Gediminas, because in genealogical and dynastical contexts, that term House refers to all agnatic descendants to the end of the world, and it not limited to near-contemporary family members of the eponymic person. Compare, for example, how terms like House of Hohenzollern, House of Sverker, House of Hanover and maison de Bourbon are used. I suspect that this naming here, house, was chosen by a person not native in English language and somewhat deficit in knowledge about dynastical research. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 16:38, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

End of dynasty
Jogaila eastablished a new dynasty called the Jagiellon dynasty, the last king of which was Sigismund II Augustus. While that dynasty originated from the House of Gediminas, it was a separate dynasty in its own right, considered as such by historians. That should be made clear. The formulation "The dynasty came to an end in 1572, when Sigismund II Augustus died without a male heir." referring to the House of Gediminas is to say the least misleading. Especially since the name Sigismund II Augustus does not occur anywhere else in the article. As the lead is supposed to summarize what is in the body of the article, obviously something is wrong here. Sorry to nitpick, but a featured article linked to the Main Page should be accurate. 74.15.22.247 (talk) 00:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

There is also a funny additional reason to cautiously view the House of Jagello as separate House from Gediminids: their contemporaries in mid-1400s knew well about the serious doubts that Casimir IV was actually sired by another man rather than by the elderly king Jagello. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 16:41, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Family of Gediminas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090213115334/http://mokslasplius.lt:80/mokslo-lietuva/node/41 to http://mokslasplius.lt/mokslo-lietuva/node/41

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:23, 29 December 2016 (UTC)