Talk:Henry the Bearded

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

move to Henry I the Bearded. Joelito (talk) 18:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC) Henryk I the Bearded → Henry I the Bearded – Rationale: Page should go back to English usage. --Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Survey

 * Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with  ~


 * Support, as nominator. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, but OTOH why bother. People would move this article to their liking anyway, regardless of the outcome (see Jagiełło for instance).  // Halibutt 00:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, as per nom. – Axman (☏) 12:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:UE. -  AjaxSmack    00:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Add any additional comments
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Broader scope
While the article as it is now does focus on Henry, it really has a broader scope than that - basically it's more or less the complete history of the Piast alliances and civil warring of the period. It could very well serve as a jump off point for a separate article on that subject.radek (talk) 09:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Alternatively the numerous sections should be made into subsections and grouped by broader topic.radek (talk) 09:16, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree to some extent, though it needs to be sourced better. The article, like many of the articles this user has translated for us, has an unrigorous grand narrative driven style which looks very old-fashioned in English (rather like this article, written by a real/life popular historian who briefly edited wikipedia); historians are trained these days to avoid the kind of unjustifiable assumptions that underlie this style. And I got to admit, when I started copy-editing it I just couldn't understand some of the things trying to be said, so I couldn't rephrase them safely. It needs to be copy-edited with reference to the Polish text upon which it is based. Doubtless if it read fluently it would be a fun read. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 09:20, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I've tried to remove some of the hyperbole though because in the copy edit my primary purpose was to make it readable and understandable I left it alone some in places. Grammar first, then style. What makes things hard to understand is that there is so much going on - shifting alliances, betrayals, betrothals, broken betrothals, deaths - this'd be confusing even in clearly written English (or Polish).


 * Same issue/delay with references, let's get this copy edited first. The Polish version of this article is extensively and impressively cited - unfortunately I don't have access to all the works listed there.


 * One thing that I would like to get others' opinion on. I think it makes it easier for the reader if after the first mention of a particular Duke, for example, Władysław III Spindleshanks, he is subsequently referred to as "Spindleshanks". Otherwise it's gonna be "Władysław III this" but "Władysław II that" and it's going to be hard for readers unfamiliar with this part of Piast history to keep track. This isn't as much of a problem with Henry himself, or Leszek, Mieszko and Konrad, but there is quite a number of Władysławs here and a couple Bolesławs. What's the convention for other areas at this time?radek (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I suppose that's alright. The other thing is to refer to them by their main holdings, when that dabs. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 06:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Change categories' sort orders
I hope nobody objects; I've changed the default sort order in the categories. It had been set to sort as Bearded, Henry I the. At least in Category:House of Piast it makes more sense--and is more consistent with the bulk of the other entries--to have it sort as Henry. If anybody feels that it should be the other way in some other category, perhaps they could change it for that particular category, rather than across the board. 71.126.140.136 (talk) 19:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

Article name
Gbooks hits: "Henry the Bearded" (27), "Henryk the Bearded" (26), "Henry I the Bearded" (23), "Henryk I the Bearded" (16); Gscholar "Henry the Bearded" (91), "Henry I the Bearded" (38), "Henryk the Bearded" (6), "Henryk I the Bearded" (0). Bold move to Henry the Bearded.--Z oupan 19:38, 24 February 2016 (UTC)