Talk:Philip the Bold

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion 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. 

Philip II, Duke of Burgundy → Philip the Bold – The current title is rarely, if ever used; the replacement, however, is the most common name used. Michael Sanders 22:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Survey
''Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" or other opinion in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~
 * Support as nominator Michael Sanders 22:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Philip III of France is also a "Philip the Bold." Srnec 01:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose. Much less well-known by this epithet. Also, it is bad practice to translate le Hardi and le Temeraire with the same word. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * But nonetheless, "Philip the Bold" is his most common English name. Philip III of France is far less frequently known as such. Michael Sanders 13:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the . 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.

''The primary meaning of "Philip the Bold" is the subject of this article, so there is no reason for this article not to occupy that location. I have therefore disregarded Srnec's opposition, with the proviso that a dablink be placed on this article linking to Philip III of France. Bad translating practice is also no argument for or against a title, while common usage is. This article has been renamed as the result of a move request.'' --Stemonitis 17:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Musée des Écoles d'art de Dijon
"It was restored in the first half of the 19th century, and is today at the Musée des Écoles d'art de Dijon in the Palace of the Dukes of Burgundy."

This is an error. No such museum exists (as a quick google will show). It should be Musée des Beaux-Arts de Dijon.

David

82.224.103.123 (talk) 18:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Corrected - it was right at Champmol in any case. Johnbod (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

"low-country" / "Netherlandish" Bavarians
Hello and all- Can anyone enlighten me as to what this term refers to? I did a quick search before my last edit, and after Johnbod's subsequent change, but I didn't find any info. (diff of our combined edits) Eric talk 18:18, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure - try Albert I, Duke of Bavaria, who is linked in the article. I suggest you excercise caution in editing things you don't understand, especially as your research skills seem a bit limited. Johnbod (talk) 18:22, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The Low Countries is the geographic descriptive names for the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg. They are "low" because they are at the lower end of the Rhine Valley. The word "Netherlands" literally just means "Low Lands." Netherlandish, therefore, refers to somebody from the Low Countries. The family of Albert I, Duke of Bavaria, despite his confusing title since he is by birth a member of the Wittelsbach family and, therefore, a Duke of Bavaria, is the head of a branch of the family that became established in the Low Countries as Counts of Holland, Hainaut, and Zeeland. Hence "Netherlandish Bavarians." I hope that clarifies things some. – Whaleyland (Talk • Contributions) 00:08, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure Eric knows the first bits, but the 2nd was new to him. Usually the Low Countries are regarded as "low" because they are mostly as flat as a pancake, at next to no altitude. I think you might be confusing them with "Niederrhein", which is rather different.  Our Low Countries gives a further totally different explanation for the term, which I'm rather dubious about. Johnbod (talk) 01:45, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , while you no doubt are highly skilled at assessing other people's "research skills" and their level of understanding based on pretty much nothing, if you were to engage in the intellectual exercise of re-reading my question from a hypothetical perspective of someone who is trying to improve the encyclopedia for all readers by pointing out something that is missing from the passage in question -- say, a link or reference that places the term "Netherlandish Bavarian" in context -- you would no doubt grasp the purpose of my post, given your obviously superior erudition. By the way, the Google Books Ngram viewer, which makes a good first stop for determining the prevalence of a given term in a given language, yields nothing for either "Netherlandish Bavarian" or "low-country Bavarian" -- the first zero result I've ever seen on there, and I've made extensive use of it during my long history of not developing any research skills.
 * , thanks for the explanation here on the talkpage. As I apparently failed to make clear in my original post, I think that explanation is lacking from the passage to which I referred. And thanks, I'm checked out on Netherlands/Low Countries. Maybe I should have made that clear from the outset, but I kind of presumed it would be inferred from my ability to write in complete sentences in the year 2020. My mistake. Eric talk 02:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I did check out possible links - Wittelsbach is linked nearby, & doesn't have a section on the Netherlandish branch, no doubt because they didn't last long. Your initial edit, just removing any descriptor, leaving "Bavarians" is certainly a move in the wrong direction for the reader. Now you have all the information, feel free to expand what's there.  Johnbod (talk) 02:28, 10 November 2020 (UTC)