User talk:Hermandw

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Merovingian - Talk 03:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Descendants of [X] articles
I have some concerns that these sorts of articles (e.g. Descendants of Charlemagne) are indiscriminate lists, which is something which Wikipedia is not. They are also of doubtful verifiability (and verifiability is a core requirement). Others may disagree. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Srnec 22:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I must disagree. Wikipedia, to me _IS_ a collection of lists, pointing to articles, some of which not necessarily yet in existance. I happen to be quite interested in this "list", and don't find it indiscriminate. As to the verifiability, this part of history is of course somewhat vague, and other sources might disagree, but then that's up to later additions to alter. Uncertainty does not equal unverifiability! Hermandw 10:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I also agree. And is it necessary to mention that someone is an xth-generation descendant of Charlemagne? Isn't he everyone's ancestor? Why single out Charlemagne specifically? Adam Bishop 07:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I also agree that these are indiscriminate lists. WP:NOT is policy, not just opinion, although your articles may or may not be covered by that policy. Obviously, some genealogy is appropriate as biographical information (a person's immediate family and sometimes children-in-law, more distant relatives from or to whom the person inherited or left some important property or title). Genealogy is also important when dealing with some reigning family, say, the Dukes of Lorraine, where one likes to track the inheritance of the land through the family. But simply compiling "Descendants of X" doesn't have, in my opinion, that extra-genealogical, encyclopedic element; a quick glance at, say, Leo van des Pas' work will convince one that after a few generations, there's *no* common tie but "descent from X", which is not *in itself* (IMO) encyclopedic. Personally, I would suggest that you move these lists to your own userspace, and use them to coordinate the eventual production of articles "not necessarily yet in existance". See, for instance User:Choess/Blazonrolls, where I have a list of armigers in the Falkirk Roll, which hopefully can eventually be used to add coats-of-arms to various articles. I don't think it's appropriate in article space, but it's a useful tool in userspace. Choess 15:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Not a genealogy
Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and not a genealogical database. Your edits could be more useful if they were more innocuous. For example: Odo I, Count of Blois, tells us nothing about Odo and everything about his relatives. Srnec 00:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)