Talk:House of Wittelsbach

[Untitled]

 * 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. 

no move. --  tariq abjotu  23:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC) In order to be compliant with the naming of royal houses, such as the House of Windsor. Gryffindor 08:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I urge caution. Windsor is currently reigning; in this case the "House of .." is necessary for disambiguation purposes.  How important does a family have to be in order to be "House of ..."?  Is Hohenlohe important enough?  How about Rothschild or Hearne? Noel S McFerran 10:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * For an important royal dynasty such as the Wittelsbachs, I would support this renaming. Charles 16:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. House of Windsor disambiguates from Windsor Castle, Windsor, Ontario usw. The dynasty here is clearly the primary usage; we don't even have an article on the eponymous castle, or the brook. Let's keep things simple, and avoid masking links. Septentrionalis 22:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. As per Septentrionalis. Also, whether a dynasty is currently reigning or not seems to be good enough of a criterion. Blur4760 20:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 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.

Move
Has there been a dynasty guideline change for this article's move from Wittelsbach to House of Wittelsbach? While I personally have no objection to the move, the above move request was fairly recent. Additionally, I have not found any mention yet of the town of Wittelsbach; the German WP has an article on de:Burg Wittelsbach, however. Olessi 16:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * There have been a number of moves to include "House" in the names of dynasties. I have initiated a few of them, others have moved other ones. A number of the moves have been from terms containing "dynasty" to ones containing "house" and others have been moved from the bare house name. Wittelsbach itself is only a name. This is an article about the House of that name. It makes sense to me to have it here. In fact, I would not have even put it up for the Nov 2006 RM. Charles 16:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I would say that Wittelsbach should redirect here then. Olessi 18:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It should. I have no idea who changed it away from redirecting here. Charles 20:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Jacobite claim
Since none of the Jacobite claimants outside the House of Stuart has publicly taken up the claim to the English and Scottish thrones, it is effectively fan fiction, even if it's worth a passing mention in the text as a fringe theory. It gives these claims grossly undue weight to mention them in the infobox. Hairy Dude (talk) 14:02, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * When something is written about in numerous scholarly sources, it is not "fan fiction" or a "fringe theory". Wikipedia is based on sources, not the private opinions of editors. (But I agree regarding the infobox). Noel S McFerran (talk) 07:46, 17 March 2022 (UTC)