Talk:King of Jerusalem

Image: Guy de Lusignan
Disputed, may be a detail of an Adoration of the Magi by Rubens, see Talk & same image in article Guy of Lusignan. D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 06:24, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling.
This article was tagged with the tag, which says This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. As a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, I find that is not the case, and have replaced the tag with {{Dead end, meaning that there are a good many names and places which need Wikilinks. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

"portraits"
Giving portraints in "list format" is not helpful. If you want to show a 15th-century depiction of Godfrey of Bouillon, that's fine, but it needs a caption so the reader can appreciate what he is looking at. If we must include graphical elements in list format, it will have to be coins or seals, as this is the type of graphical identification that was available at the time. Showing "15th-century Godfrey" simply labelled "portrait" in a list does nothing except perpetuate the misconception that the "Jerusalem cross" is indeed the historical coat of arms of the Kingdom of Jerusalem (in reality, it was first used in the 1280s (on coins and not (that we know) in actual heraldry), i.e. by the very last kings in Acre, and never in Jerusalem). --dab (𒁳) 10:03, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Then list it as an image. This is the standard used on all monarchical list and history articles. Examples include the ones for France, England and the Holy Roman Empire. Godfrey's image is not the first anachronistic image on Wikipedia on a list and article and it won't be the last. Why must a list be restricted to contemporary images (some which don't exist) and the articles themselves still retain the use of these images? --The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 15:40, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Aragonese claimants
Charles V is V only in the German empire: in Aragon he is Charles I. Philip II is Philip I in Aragon; Philip III is II; Philip IV is III; Philip V is IV and Philip VI is V. Why? Because Philip I (Charles I's father) was only King of Castille and he died before his father-in-law, Ferdinand III, king of Aragon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.219.212.108 (talk) 18:22, 22 April 2018 (UTC)