Talk:Petronilla of Aragon - Knowledge (XXG)

1972: 1041:

picture of girlfriend with a crown on at a Renaissance Fair and uploaded it here under the file name "Queen_Petronilla_of_Aragon". The fact that somebody beat me to it by 500 years does not make the image a depiction of Petronilla. Now, (a) if it showed a woman doing something distinctly associated in historical memory with Petronilla, or (b) if it was of great artistic merit and witnessed the legacy of the queen in the centuries after her death, or even (c) if we had nothing better, then I could live with the image. But in this case we (a) have something very much better, (b) have a portrait of little artistic merit and having nothing to do with what people thought of Petronilla in the 15th century and (c) have a portrait that could be of any queen of the Middle Ages, with nothing distinct about it to indicate that it must be Petronilla. For these reasons, it is educationally practically valueless—at least next to the charter.

1984: 1175:, now blocked, added it a few days ago) and the one that was there before (the charter that is lower on the page right now). I have argued that the contemporary charter, bearing the subject's signature and perhaps her own thoughts or words, is superior to a much later image that was never intended to depict the subject, but was mainly decorative. User:EeuHP has argued that the lead image to a biographical article should by default be a depiction of the person, and that disqualifying posthumous or late images would leave most pre-modern biographies barren. Is one image more appropriate as the lead image for this subject? 368: 347: 452: 1948: 1345: 283: 265: 378: 1996: 1960: 139: 77: 53: 22: 906:

EeuHP's recent changes to the article. Why make the article look longer than it is? And why subsume all of the body text under one heading? What use is the heading then? And why list her children in point form? Is it too hard for people to read in a sentence? All these recent edits, to me, move the article away from its encyclopaedic purpose (to be read) and towards something more database-y.

185: 167: 1936: 195: 483: 87: 1197:, which seems to prefer the picture of the lady, as opposed to the picture of the document: "Lead images should be images that are natural and appropriate visual representations of the topic". As this is an article about the lady, a picture of the lady is a visual representation of the topic. Cheers, -- 1807:

Moreover, the section heading not break up the article. They make reading easier. Petronilla almost was born married. All her life can be divide in three period: before her wedding night (childhood), after her wedding night (full age) and when she was widow. I think that the division is perninent and

1606:

He has rejected all images of Petronilla (saying that its validity was the same as a picture of his girlfriend painted by him with a pencil). He accused me of ignoring the importance of the document (when I had accepted that it was in the body of the article). He removed my editions eight times (even

1546:

and now he defend the extended version of the same image (with Petronilla, Ramon Berenguer and Alfonso II). Why put a picture of three people (very excessive) when exist a cropped version of Petronilla? Would not it be easier to leave the image of Petronilla? It is possible, but he is a genius and he

1404:

of that by looking at the picture. They'll learn it by reading the article. So the picture should be used to illustrate the appropriate section of the article. The function of the lead image is not to teach readers anything; it shouldn't need a long caption to explain all the esoteric elements. It is

1260:

Yes, in the sense that in this case the image portrays a lady who is docketed as the lady this article is about. Obviously, if we had a contemporary portrait we'd use that, but as we don't we need to use a picture that we do have. The subject of this article isn't the charter so using an image of the

920:

You say that the painting is not "educational"? What is "educational"? I don't understand. The function of the section "image" is put a picture of the person to illustrate the article. If only there to put a painting (or sculpture) created during the life of the historical figure, 80% of the articles

2034:

The purpose of a lede image is not to be "pretty" it is to represent what the person looked like, or -- in this case -- how the person was imagined to have looked like. The only image which does a halfway decent job of this is #6. (I added the numbers.) I still don't understand on what ground Smec

1782:

I am opposed to "compartmentalizing" because the section headings are meaningless. They do not help the reader navigate because all they do is refer to ill-defined chronological periods in any person's life. They break up the text for no other reason than to break it up. We have paragraphs for that.

1382:

The image at right illustrates a several things for the reader's benefit: the difference in status between the queen and her husband, the count; that the queen's status passed to her son (i.e. he didn't become king b/c of his dad); and that in the first decade of the 15th century this was remembered

643:

confused by any misspellings and bad grammar. (I also get very confused by the pronouns, but that's another story.) As for the medieval history, my knowledge is not at all strong. I would probably not catch any Catalan out in a mis-statement; I've simply been relying on the people writing in Catalan

598:

No, though if someone wants to start one, I'm in. Do you read Catalan? A lot of material in the English-language Knowledge (XXG) about Catalonia/Aragon medieval history originally came from the Catalan-language Knowledge (XXG). Any such project should probably try to rope in some of the contributors

2006:

The above is the lead image (debate) history. I stand by my position in the RFC. I would be happy with the charter at the top or in the infobox. I don't care if the infobox stays or goes. I think #2 is an acceptable compromise for the lead or the box. If we must have a decorative image, the current

696:

On the spelling: I think in this case "Pétronille" is useful because a lot of the searchable web content about her uses that form of the name. I don't by any means advocate reproducing all international forms of a royal name, but I find that it is useful to give ones that might aid someone in doing

638:

to start learning some Catalan. Also, in the last few years I've put in what adds up to maybe 50 hours of more systematic study and maybe another 50-100 hours of attempted translations. And I bought a decent dictionary. At this point, I read it pretty decently, but still hesitate to try to write in

1853:

The move to get "Notes" below was good. Now the problem is that there is much space blank. But we can solve without compartmentalize the article. We just need a title "Biography" to separate the introductory paragraph of the rest of the article and put the children of Petronilla in list mode (thus

714:

was an exception at the time… Petronila's succession created a new case in succession custom in Aragon." Given that Petronila did, indeed succeed to the throne, the first phrase here seems inherently false. I am editing it to "The Aragonese monarchy had previously passed only to males…" If that is

1797:

The key is that the image broken the harmony of the text: the annex paragraph and the section title "notes" are moved to the right. If I were the only editor, I'll remove the image. But I preferred to keep it to avoid arguments. Now, I try to make other harmony (a image with less size and section

1298:

I rather dislike the lead image at Jesus, but the case is not comparable, since we have no contemporary artefact directly associated with him. As for the image you suggest, I won't bother critiquing it. It's all made-up, which is fine for what it is, but, in my opinion, apparently contrary to the

1074:

2. The letter (though valuable) is unacceptable in the place where you want to put in the beginning (if you believe that there is no valid paint, you should believe that in "image" there should be nothing). And I do not change my opinion. The place where the letter is now is the correct. I no see

582:

So we're talking about modern spellings? Then we'll have to include them all, in every language (Aragonese medieval lexicology used to be pretty strong in Finland - shall we add a Finnish version, then?). I thought we should only include spellings in Latin/Spanish/Catalan and a common English one

1550:

I do not want to be locked again. Only say that I am opposed the document (it does not serve to enlighten readers about the person) and I'm opposed the image that he defends now (three people is excessive, we only need one person to illustrate the article). Maybe I'm not a genius, but I think my

1040:

You clearly have no idea what I am saying (perhaps you just don't know English well enough). I am not categorically rejecting posthumous depictions. I am arguing that the image you insist on barely even deserves the label "depiction". It is nothing of the sort. It is about as good as if I drew a

1226:

Yes, even in that case, see the same MoS page which says "images should look like what they are meant to illustrate, even if they are not provably authentic images". There are other articles with similar problems with images, although this is probably one of the least representative ones. If no

905:

I disagree. I do not believe that whatever educational value the 15th-century miniature has justifies its prominence in this article about a 12th-century queen. The charter is incomparably more significant and its educational value too far exceeds that of the late portrait. I also disagree with

1834:

I do not see how headings make reading easier, since they assigne basically one paragraph to a section. The division, moreover, is applicable to anyone's life. That was my point. Who comes to this article looking to learn about Petronilla's "later years"? Also, the bulleted list of children is

1092:

What are you talking about? I don't want any drawing of her that doesn't meet the criteria I set out. To my knowledge, she plays little to no role in Spanish/Catalan historical consciousness. Her legacy, in common memory, is nil. Therefore, there is no portrait of her that we could justify on

677:

I majored in medieval Aragon at the University so I should be the man for the job. OTOH, if projects are for streamlining content presentation then we probably don't need on for the Corona de Aragón. Might as weel just go along and add bits of info on everyone. And I do like your Ethnic Group

1778:

I agree about the caption and have amended it. About the size of the image, I believe we should not generally force image sizes. Logged-in users can set defaults in their preferences. Other users will have screens of various sizes and resolutions, so forcing the size does not optimise it for

1971: 1868:

A "biography" heading is meaningless and list mode is, as I pointed out, discouraged. Instead, I removed the "issue" from the infobox as redundant. There are two ways to fix the white space: remove the infobox or make the article longer by adding information with references.

1352:

I think this image would be better than the current one, although Petronilla is only one of three figures in it. It illustrates her key relationships and visualises the distinction between her (crowned) and her husband (not). Petronill and her son are facing into the page.

1529:

Distrustful people may think that Srnec is stupid, but he is not stupid. A stupid person couldn't have done what he did to get rid of me. His maneuver was very clever. He couldn't let that a user "boss" saw our edit war because both would be blocked. But if he reopened an

991:

It seems you want to remove the picture and put the letter in his place. Sorry, but this claim is illogical. The "image" refers to a person's image, painted or sculpted. Put her act of abdication have the same logic that put a photo of your college diploma in the identity

953:

You need to read better. I did not say the painting is not educational. I said that "whatever educational value has" does not "justif its prominence" here. Neither did I ever say that only a contemporary depiction was admissible. What I am saying is that when an image is

1884: 2082: 1428:

Nobody is supposed to learn it from the image alone, but the image should at least illustrate something found in the article, preferably something more unique to her than "royal woman". This image, unlike many we use, is not in any way a likeness of Petronilla. So

1983: 1044:

There is no Knowledge (XXG) rule that we must you a "depiction" of a person as the main image in an article on him/her. Don't be fooled by the infobox. "Image" is just the name of a field, it need not be an image of the person whose name is atop the stupid box.

657:

If you do want to start a WikiProject on this, I will gladly join. And help out. I'm not ready to start another myself, because I'm already not giving adequate attention to the Ethnic Groups WikiProject and the Translation project, both of which I started. --

1227:

agreement can be reached as to the appropriateness of an image, the MoS page also provides that a lead image isn't mandatory on a page. In case the portrait is chosen, it should be represented correctly as a later work, see e.g. the way the lead image of

633:

Cool! Sounds like you have quite an advantage over me. My Catalan is just barely OK for reading. I have near-fluent Spanish (and pretty decent Romanian), and I spent enough time in Barcelona and painfully plowed through museum wall texts and copies of

1625:

I share your position on the matter, but I assure you that talk to the hand is not a pleasant task. He wants the image of infobox inform more that the article and a week later he continues to think the same. He is entrenched. I hope you have better

731:"Petronila came to the throne under extenuating circumstances." This makes no sense. "Extenuating circumstances" are those which tend to excuse a crime or mitigate its severity. Ascending to the throne is in no sense a crime. What is meant here? -- 1322:

There was a dispute. There was a third opinion, with which I still disagreed. That's grounds for an RFC. I will bow to the wishes of my fellow editors, even though I continue to believe the current lead image is not helpful to our readers.

1093:

artistic merits alone. No artist, no historian, no demagogue has taken her up. All the picture of her are mostly meaningless placeholders. We have a lot of those at Knowledge (XXG), and if it were up to me many (perhaps most) would be gone.

614:

as there's lot of incorrect info there (like stating Peter the Catholic died on the next day after the battle of Muret - he died on the battlefield early in the battle). I might actually pitch in and correct everything which is wrong in

1075:

reason for complaint: there is only one image in the body of the text and is the letter (and I have decreased the size of the letter because before dislocated the position of the section "notes". A simple aesthetic criteria).--

1211:

Do you think this applies when there is no near contemporary visual representation of the subject? Should we then use, as in this case, a much later picture in preference to a contemporary document of the lady's own issuing?

958:

a genuine depiction of a person, we need a different reason from "intended to give the reader a picture of a person", since the image does no such thing. Such is the case here. The "paper", as you call it (it isn't one, it's

1670:

Since I was an involved party in this discussion and this topic appears to be contentious and has continued in a new form a another article topic, I have self reverted my non-admin closure of the RfC and have relisted it at

984:

Sometimes, the portraits made during the life of the person hiding their flaws and made them look better. There are portraits of a person, made during his life, that are completely different of others of the same

1144:

have 17th-c images, and there are plenty of other examples of non-contemporary images in the lead of articles.) So I see no problem assessing consensus here: the image in the infobox, the charter further on down.

1096:

Why is the charter unacceptable at the beginning? If it is because of the infobox, let's get rid of the infobox. But where is there a rule that says only a picture of the article's subject must be in the infobox?

1383:(that Ramon Berenguer did not become king). What does the reader learn about Petronilla or her life/reign from an obscure 15th-century image? Does he even learn anything about her legacy or posthumous reputation? 1830:

Well, I know how I would fix that bunching problem. . . Seriously, it is a problem only on some screens (not mine) and section headings are not the way to solve it. I have added a {{clr}} template, I hope that

1651:

are most appropriate to put in the infobox. These images are closer to her time and fulfill their purpose of illustrating the article. Ah, and I think that divide the informations into compartments are not bad

1348:

Count Raymond Berengar (top left), holding a ring, marries Queen Petronilla (top right), crowned and holding a sceptre. Their son and heir, King Alfonso (bottom), is also shown crowned and holding a sceptre.

924:

Also, place a paper in the "image" (intended to give the reader a picture of a person) makes no sense. And even having placed the letter in the body of the article (which clogs) your opposition is not minor.

1616:

And now he has completely changed his opinion and accepted a painting, precisely the worst of all (the only one where the presence of Petronilla goes unnoticed -the opposite of the mission of the infobox-).

2066:

This clearly disqualifies fanciful depictions from the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries because these are not associated with the subject in modern scholarship. I would much rather see one of those in the

2157: 1289:? That seems better than both of those. And I don't see what being contemporary has to do with anything; there are no contemporary portraits of Jesus, but his article still has a stylized image of him. 1245:

But do provably inauthentic images "look like what they are meant to illustrate"? We have no reason to believe so. All we can say is that the image is of a royal woman and Petronilla was a royal woman.

875:

to this exchange I hope this is a compromise that is acceptable to you both. Personally I believe using two images, rather than just one is advantageous to the look and educational value of the article.

323: 2085:

nor did women in 12th-century Catalonia dress in 16th-century Portuguese fashion; but that is exactly what an average reader will gather from that image. For what it's worth, last year there was an

329: 1386:

I am not absolutely opposed to merely decorative images, but I think that decoration is of secondary importance. In this case, we have options and we do not have to fall back on a mere decoration.

1072:

1. The (in your opinion) poor quality of the picture does not take away its age. It is the most oldest drawing of her in Commons. Would you accept another picture, higher quality, but more modern?

1754:

I have decreased slightly the size of the image because I think that so overwhelms least paragraph next door and I think that the images don't must detract prominence to the words without reason.

977:

Thanks for attacking my edition in the article of Nicholas II. An edit war against me is very little for you, it seems. Reasoning with you is a futile enterprise. But I will try one last time.

828:

Her tomb may have been lost because the existing Gothic cathedral began construction in 1298; Petronilla died in 1173 when the Romanesque cathedral, built in the 11th century, was on the site.

2162: 2152: 2122: 473: 583:(it's en.wikipedia, after all, not fr:). BTW, I uploaded a list of counts of Urgell - care to have a look and check names (Armengol/Ermengol/Ermengarius, Sunifred(o)/Sunyer/Suniarius)? 299: 2086: 539: 2192: 927:

You oppose my latest changes. I don't understand. Compartmentalize information is not bad. Put the names of the children of the queen in "list mode" helps them look better.--

290: 270: 759:

The editor in question changed it to "special". I still don't think it adds much (the facts follow immediately), but this isn't the sort of thing worth fighting over. --

2117: 529: 2202: 2187: 434: 1947: 505: 148: 63: 2197: 2172: 1995: 1510: 424: 1313:

Well, as you say, your opinion is contrary to the manual of style. And apparently you're the only one who has a problem with it. Hardly grounds for an RfC.

1736:) for easier reading. This article looks better that way and if, in the future, more information is added, the work for clarification is already advanced. 2182: 2142: 1171:

See the preceding section. There are two main candidates to be the primary image (i.e. the image in the infobox): the one that is currently there (since

804: 241: 1588:

Everyone tells me "Do not talk about other editors." Sorry, but that's nonsense. It is impossible to speak about my position without a mention to Srnec.

105: 2167: 496: 457: 400: 247: 2132: 2112: 109: 1538:

But the genius does not stop there. Now he defend the image of the right side and I can't understand the decisions of his brain. Why he refused

1534:

where I participated, I would be the only blocked (by "recidivism") and he would not be punished. And so it happened. A maneuver worthy of him.

2039:. The 2014 RfC image (#1) would be OK if there were a version of it with better resolution. As it is it to too poor an image to be the lede. 2177: 800: 1497:

Hello. I'm back and now I understand the situation. Srnec is a misunderstood genious. A normal person see the article of Petronilla, think "

2147: 2127: 391: 352: 104:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge (XXG)'s articles about people. All interested editors are invited to 2137: 1597:

I talked to him during three days, trying to explain why his decision (put a document in the infobox's section "image") was not correct.

217: 1286: 113: 100: 58: 2073:

Lead images are not required, and not having a lead image may be the best solution if there is no easy representation of the topic.

591:

And another question (I'm totally new here): is there some project to coordinate efforts on Catalonia/Aragon medieval history? --

864:

I have retained the portrait in the infobox, but have used the caption field to add the qualification it is from a much later text

2081:

In my opinion, having no image in the lead is certainly better than having a fanciful image in the lead. She did not look like

1779:

everyone. That's why I prefer the parameter "upright" to make the image smaller. I don't know what you mean about the "Notes".

697:

basic research. Maybe these should be identified by language, though. I've done that elsewhere, didn't think to do it here. --

33: 504:

and related articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

963:), is a contemporary artifact of great importance for understanding and learning about Petronilla (i.e., it's educational). 298:-speaking countries on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join 208: 172: 1166:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1703:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

808: 367: 346: 814:

Yes, that would have been the most likely scenario, unless the tomb was later transferred to another church or abbey.--

1712:

Seems that Srnec want to be my eternal opponent and as I don't want to war, I would ask to the users their opinion of

1648: 1539: 1514: 1465: 1959: 1759:

And I get down the title "Notes" because the section was disjointed and I think the composition should be harmonious.

823: 780:

What happened to the image of Petronilla which was used a few months ago? It was much better than the current one.--

569:

I've seen lots of spellings for it. I suggest we keep it Petronila (sounds better). Where did see "Pétronille"? --

980:

The picture illustrating the article. You have not given any reason why a painting years later should not appear.

872: 1464:. Even though the image is from a later period it is still more appropriate than the photo of the charter. This 472: 451: 2036: 39: 21: 867:

I have added the image of the charter in the body of the article, at an appropriate position chronologically.

2044: 1368:

I'm not particularly opposed to this new image, although I'd prefer the one with just Petronilla. Cheers, --

833: 819: 785: 1935: 1461: 1194: 2064:

Lead images should be ... the type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works...

1344: 829: 748: 399:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

216:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

1037:

You don't get to decide how many times you try to reason with me. That's not how Knowledge (XXG) works.

799:

How do you lose a tomb in a church that still stands today? Was it looted or sacked by enemy forces?--

2068: 2062:

That would seem to disqualify the charter, as the topic is a person, not the charter or abdication.

2094: 1419: 1373: 1266: 1236: 1202: 711: 921:

would be without any image. Is that what you want? Place the earliest known portrait is not a sin.

2040: 2010: 1686: 1644: 1506: 1502: 1479: 815: 781: 383: 2079:

allow for having no image in the lead, it states that no image may sometimes be the best option.

1672: 1655:(the document in the article dislocates the text and the division helps readability, I think).-- 610:

I read both modern and medieval Catalan. However, there's next to no use translating stuff from

1743:

Charter by Which Petronilla abdicated (18 July 1164) in Favour of her son Alfonso II of Aragon

1523:

WTF??? The infobox should illustrate the appearance of the person and a paper does not do that

1749:. Why? Because in the accompanying paragraph already appears the date on which she abdicated. 1150: 1137: 764: 745: 736: 720: 501: 295: 294:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of 92: 282: 264: 2024: 1905: 1891: 1874: 1859: 1844: 1813: 1788: 1768: 1660: 1631: 1556: 1438: 1391: 1358: 1328: 1304: 1251: 1217: 1180: 1102: 1080: 1050: 997: 968: 932: 911: 892: 396: 377: 599:

there and should probably cross over at least English and Catalan, and maybe Spanish. --

2090: 2014: 1415: 1369: 1262: 1232: 1198: 1141: 1125: 488: 1839:, where it says, "Do not use lists if a passage is read easily as plain paragraphs". 1836: 710:

Recently anonymously added "The kingdom was inherited only by males, thus Petronila's

2106: 2076: 2055: 1989:#5 - Image to replace charter in May 2021. Another user removed it and I restored it. 1678: 1471: 1133: 878: 1517:). But Srnec no. He is a genious and the genious never take the easy way. He prefer 1084: 881: 1571: 1406: 1314: 1290: 1129: 679: 620: 592: 570: 200: 1570:

valid, but please discuss your point of view about the photos, not other editors.

2089:, ending in a nearly unanimous consensus not to use fanciful images in the lead. 1414:

Kafziel makes a good point, we can use this image further down in the article. --

1724:

I've compartmentalized the information on the life of the queen in three parts (

1228: 1146: 760: 732: 716: 698: 659: 600: 576: 562: 2098: 2048: 2028: 1909: 1895: 1878: 1863: 1848: 1817: 1792: 1772: 1693: 1664: 1635: 1574: 1560: 1486: 1442: 1423: 1409: 1395: 1377: 1362: 1332: 1317: 1308: 1293: 1270: 1255: 1240: 1221: 1206: 1184: 1154: 1106: 1054: 1001: 972: 936: 915: 896: 860:

As regards the use of images in the article, I have made edits to the article:

837: 789: 767: 751: 739: 76: 52: 2020: 1901: 1887: 1870: 1855: 1840: 1809: 1784: 1764: 1656: 1627: 1552: 1434: 1387: 1354: 1324: 1300: 1299:

MoS, makes it unworthy of being the lead image (when we have another option).

1247: 1213: 1176: 1172: 1098: 1076: 1046: 993: 964: 928: 907: 888: 855: 851: 478: 373: 190: 82: 2001:#6 - User who added the prev. image decided on this one, but I reverted back. 1977:#4 - After image was removed in April 2020, I moved this one up in September 960: 138: 1579:

Honestly, I have wanted to laugh (because it's better to laugh than mourn).

184: 166: 1900:

It is your responsibility to add citations to material you add, not mine.

1798:

headings to get that "Notes" get down and leave the right of the article).

1525:". But Srnec thinks it does. Why? Because he is a misunderstood genious. 1261:

charter seems contrary to the MoS section quoted first above. Cheers, --

575:

Mostly in French-language sources. Do a web-search, you'll find it. --

1747:

Charter by Which Petronilla abdicated in Favour of her son Alfonso II

112:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the 2071:

section, which discusses how she was seen in the later centuries.

1808:

correct and help my intention of make a new harmonic structure .--

1343: 213: 715:

not what was meant, could someone please reword more clearly? --

1468:

would also be fine and I also favor it over the charter image.--

1136:

all agree that the MOS strongly favors an image of the person. (

15: 561:

Isn't "Petronilla" the more common spelling of her name? --

137: 2060:

Lead images should ... illustrate the topic specifically...

1460:-- I prefer the current photo per Dailycare above and MOS 1854:

adding additional information about the role they had).--

989:

The letter is already in the article. Why do you insist?

1717: 1713: 1653: 1543: 1531: 1518: 678:

Project. Let's see if I can do something there as well

2158:

Unknown-importance Catalan-speaking countries articles

308:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Catalan-speaking countries

500:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 395:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 212:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2035:reverted my addition of it, it appeared to be pure 328:This article has not yet received a rating on the 246:This article has not yet received a rating on the 1953:#2 - Image I proposed as a compromise in the RFC 2163:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countries articles 2153:Start-Class Catalan-speaking countries articles 2123:Unknown-importance biography (royalty) articles 1708:Request for comment on structure of the article 1030:I did not "attack" your edit to Nicholas II. I 311:Template:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countries 1675:so it can be closed by an un-involved party.-- 1643:Anyway, the only thing left to do is say that 1607:cosmetic changes). And he managed to expel me. 8: 744:I would guess "unlikely" or "complicated." 514:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Women's History 19: 2054:The purpose of a lead image is defined by 446: 341: 259: 161: 47: 2118:Start-Class biography (royalty) articles 1519:the document of abdication of Petronilla 2193:Low-importance Women's History articles 2087:RfC on non-contemporary images of popes 1931: 448: 409:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Middle Ages 343: 261: 163: 49: 291:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countries 1034:it. Because it is not an improvement. 122:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Biography 7: 2203:WikiProject Women's History articles 2188:Start-Class Women's History articles 1162:The following discussion is closed. 887:I agree with you. For me, alright.-- 517:Template:WikiProject Women's History 494:This article is within the scope of 389:This article is within the scope of 288:This article is within the scope of 206:This article is within the scope of 98:This article is within the scope of 2198:All WikiProject Women-related pages 2173:Low-importance Middle Ages articles 314:Catalan-speaking countries articles 38:It is of interest to the following 1405:solely to illustrate the subject. 14: 2183:All WikiProject Middle Ages pages 2143:Unknown-importance Spain articles 1118:Request for comment on main image 226:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Spain 2168:Start-Class Middle Ages articles 1994: 1982: 1970: 1958: 1946: 1934: 1720:. My reasons by the change are: 1699:The discussion above is closed. 1193:: I found a section of the MoS: 481: 471: 450: 412:Template:WikiProject Middle Ages 376: 366: 345: 281: 263: 193: 183: 165: 149:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility 85: 75: 51: 20: 1835:disapproved of in the MOS, see 801:Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy 534:This article has been rated as 429:This article has been rated as 2133:WikiProject Biography articles 2113:Start-Class biography articles 2007:one is clearly the prettiest. 1551:arguments are equally valid.-- 125:Template:WikiProject Biography 1: 1694:16:05, 24 December 2013 (UTC) 824:10:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC) 809:09:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC) 790:19:39, 13 November 2010 (UTC) 768:06:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 752:18:02, 14 November 2005 (UTC) 740:07:56, 14 November 2005 (UTC) 508:and see a list of open tasks. 403:and see a list of open tasks. 302:and see a list of open tasks. 220:and see a list of open tasks. 146:This article is supported by 2178:Start-Class history articles 1941:#1 - Lead image per 2014 RFC 1910:01:02, 8 December 2013 (UTC) 1896:00:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC) 1879:21:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC) 1864:20:50, 6 December 2013 (UTC) 1849:03:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC) 1818:15:45, 4 December 2013 (UTC) 1793:01:48, 4 December 2013 (UTC) 1773:18:11, 3 December 2013 (UTC) 1665:21:32, 15 October 2013 (UTC) 1636:21:13, 15 October 2013 (UTC) 1575:19:17, 15 October 2013 (UTC) 1561:18:40, 15 October 2013 (UTC) 1547:understands it differently. 1499:oh, an article without image 1487:19:05, 27 October 2013 (UTC) 1443:21:06, 27 October 2013 (UTC) 1424:20:14, 15 October 2013 (UTC) 1410:02:35, 15 October 2013 (UTC) 1396:01:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC) 1378:19:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC) 1363:21:05, 12 October 2013 (UTC) 1333:20:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC) 1318:18:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC) 1309:06:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC) 1294:02:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC) 1271:19:00, 12 October 2013 (UTC) 1256:06:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC) 1241:20:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC) 1155:03:49, 25 January 2014 (UTC) 110:contribute to the discussion 2148:All WikiProject Spain pages 2128:Royalty work group articles 2069:Petronilla_of_Aragon#Legacy 1714:my proposition of structure 1222:23:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC) 1207:20:14, 9 October 2013 (UTC) 1185:01:33, 9 October 2013 (UTC) 1107:02:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC) 1085:00:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC) 1055:00:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC) 1002:22:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC) 982:Why reject later paintings? 973:22:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC) 937:20:56, 7 October 2013 (UTC) 916:19:29, 7 October 2013 (UTC) 897:15:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC) 882:15:03, 7 October 2013 (UTC) 497:WikiProject Women's History 2219: 2138:Start-Class Spain articles 1965:#3 - Image after June 2018 727:Extenuating circumstances? 723:22:38, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC) 644:to know their own history. 540:project's importance scale 435:project's importance scale 330:project's importance scale 305:Catalan-speaking countries 271:Catalan-speaking countries 248:project's importance scale 229:Template:WikiProject Spain 2099:07:58, 24 June 2021 (UTC) 2049:01:41, 24 June 2021 (UTC) 2029:00:56, 24 June 2021 (UTC) 1521:. The normal people say " 1400:No one is going to learn 533: 466: 428: 361: 327: 276: 245: 178: 145: 70: 46: 1701:Please do not modify it. 1164:Please do not modify it. 682:09:44, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC) 579:17:46, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC) 565:04:13, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC) 520:Women's History articles 1745:for this one sentence: 1493:Summary and explanation 838:23:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC) 701:08:26, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC) 662:22:42, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC) 603:08:23, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC) 392:WikiProject Middle Ages 1741:I replaced the phrase 1349: 142: 28:This article is rated 1347: 706:Seeming contradiction 141: 101:WikiProject Biography 32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 1763:Thanks in advance.-- 1501:" and put an image ( 1433:is it illustrating? 1285:What was wrong with 639:the language. I get 415:Middle Ages articles 64:Royalty and Nobility 1350: 1165: 845: 384:Middle Ages portal 143: 128:biography articles 34:content assessment 2075:So not only does 1231:is introduces. -- 1163: 554: 553: 550: 549: 546: 545: 445: 444: 441: 440: 340: 339: 336: 335: 258: 257: 254: 253: 209:WikiProject Spain 160: 159: 156: 155: 2210: 2074: 2065: 2061: 2018: 1998: 1986: 1974: 1962: 1950: 1938: 1692: 1689: 1485: 1482: 1138:Geoffrey Chaucer 522: 521: 518: 515: 512: 491: 486: 485: 484: 475: 468: 467: 462: 454: 447: 417: 416: 413: 410: 407: 386: 381: 380: 370: 363: 362: 357: 349: 342: 316: 315: 312: 309: 306: 285: 278: 277: 267: 260: 234: 233: 230: 227: 224: 203: 198: 197: 196: 187: 180: 179: 169: 162: 130: 129: 126: 123: 120: 106:join the project 95: 93:Biography portal 90: 89: 88: 79: 72: 71: 66: 55: 48: 31: 25: 24: 16: 2218: 2217: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2103: 2102: 2072: 2063: 2059: 2008: 2002: 1999: 1990: 1987: 1978: 1975: 1966: 1963: 1954: 1951: 1942: 1939: 1930: 1710: 1705: 1704: 1687: 1676: 1566:Your arguments 1532:old war edition 1495: 1480: 1469: 1168: 1159: 1158: 1157: 1120: 848: 797: 778: 729: 708: 559: 519: 516: 513: 511:Women's History 510: 509: 502:Women's history 487: 482: 480: 460: 458:Women's History 414: 411: 408: 405: 404: 397:the Middle Ages 382: 375: 355: 313: 310: 307: 304: 303: 231: 228: 225: 222: 221: 199: 194: 192: 127: 124: 121: 118: 117: 91: 86: 84: 61: 29: 12: 11: 5: 2216: 2214: 2206: 2205: 2200: 2195: 2190: 2185: 2180: 2175: 2170: 2165: 2160: 2155: 2150: 2145: 2140: 2135: 2130: 2125: 2120: 2115: 2105: 2104: 2080: 2052: 2051: 2037:WP:IDONTLIKEIT 2004: 2003: 2000: 1993: 1991: 1988: 1981: 1979: 1976: 1969: 1967: 1964: 1957: 1955: 1952: 1945: 1943: 1940: 1933: 1929: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1913: 1912: 1832: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1802: 1801: 1800: 1799: 1780: 1761: 1760: 1756: 1755: 1751: 1750: 1738: 1737: 1709: 1706: 1698: 1697: 1696: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1592: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1535: 1526: 1494: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1384: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1169: 1160: 1142:Saint Boniface 1124: 1123: 1122: 1121: 1119: 1116: 1114: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1094: 1073: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1042: 1038: 1035: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 986: 944: 943: 942: 941: 940: 939: 925: 922: 900: 899: 876: 869: 868: 865: 859: 847: 844: 843: 842: 841: 840: 796: 793: 777: 776:Earlier image? 774: 773: 772: 771: 770: 728: 725: 707: 704: 703: 702: 692: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 684: 683: 668: 667: 666: 665: 664: 663: 650: 649: 648: 647: 646: 645: 626: 625: 624: 623: 605: 604: 589: 588: 587: 586: 585: 584: 558: 555: 552: 551: 548: 547: 544: 543: 536:Low-importance 532: 526: 525: 523: 506:the discussion 493: 492: 489:History portal 476: 464: 463: 461:Low‑importance 455: 443: 442: 439: 438: 431:Low-importance 427: 421: 420: 418: 401:the discussion 388: 387: 371: 359: 358: 356:Low‑importance 350: 338: 337: 334: 333: 326: 320: 319: 317: 300:the discussion 286: 274: 273: 268: 256: 255: 252: 251: 244: 238: 237: 235: 232:Spain articles 218:the discussion 205: 204: 188: 176: 175: 170: 158: 157: 154: 153: 144: 134: 133: 131: 97: 96: 80: 68: 67: 56: 44: 43: 37: 26: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2215: 2204: 2201: 2199: 2196: 2194: 2191: 2189: 2186: 2184: 2181: 2179: 2176: 2174: 2171: 2169: 2166: 2164: 2161: 2159: 2156: 2154: 2151: 2149: 2146: 2144: 2141: 2139: 2136: 2134: 2131: 2129: 2126: 2124: 2121: 2119: 2116: 2114: 2111: 2110: 2108: 2101: 2100: 2096: 2092: 2088: 2084: 2078: 2077:MOS:LEADIMAGE 2070: 2057: 2056:MOS:LEADIMAGE 2050: 2046: 2042: 2041:Beyond My Ken 2038: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2026: 2022: 2016: 2012: 2011:Beyond My Ken 1997: 1992: 1985: 1980: 1973: 1968: 1961: 1956: 1949: 1944: 1937: 1932: 1927: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1893: 1889: 1885: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1867: 1866: 1865: 1861: 1857: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1846: 1842: 1838: 1833: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1796: 1795: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1781: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1770: 1766: 1758: 1757: 1753: 1752: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1739: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1719: 1715: 1707: 1702: 1695: 1690: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1674: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1654: 1650: 1646: 1637: 1633: 1629: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1615: 1614: 1613: 1612: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1602: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1573: 1569: 1565: 1564: 1563: 1562: 1558: 1554: 1548: 1545: 1541: 1536: 1533: 1527: 1524: 1520: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1504: 1500: 1492: 1488: 1483: 1477: 1476: 1475: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1456: 1455: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1421: 1417: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1408: 1403: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1360: 1356: 1346: 1334: 1330: 1326: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1316: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1283: 1272: 1268: 1264: 1259: 1258: 1257: 1253: 1249: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1219: 1215: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1192: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1182: 1178: 1174: 1167: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1143: 1139: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1117: 1115: 1108: 1104: 1100: 1095: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1082: 1078: 1056: 1052: 1048: 1043: 1039: 1036: 1033: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1003: 999: 995: 990: 987: 983: 979: 978: 976: 975: 974: 970: 966: 962: 957: 952: 951: 950: 949: 948: 947: 946: 945: 938: 934: 930: 926: 923: 919: 918: 917: 913: 909: 904: 903: 902: 901: 898: 894: 890: 886: 885: 884: 883: 880: 874: 866: 863: 862: 861: 857: 853: 839: 835: 831: 830:Fromthemitten 827: 826: 825: 821: 817: 816:Jeanne Boleyn 813: 812: 811: 810: 806: 802: 794: 792: 791: 787: 783: 782:Jeanne Boleyn 775: 769: 766: 762: 758: 757: 756: 755: 754: 753: 750: 747: 742: 741: 738: 734: 726: 724: 722: 718: 713: 705: 700: 695: 694: 693: 681: 676: 675: 674: 673: 672: 671: 670: 669: 661: 656: 655: 654: 653: 652: 651: 642: 637: 632: 631: 630: 629: 628: 627: 622: 618: 613: 609: 608: 607: 606: 602: 597: 596: 595: 594: 581: 580: 578: 574: 573: 572: 568: 567: 566: 564: 556: 541: 537: 531: 528: 527: 524: 507: 503: 499: 498: 490: 479: 477: 474: 470: 469: 465: 459: 456: 453: 449: 436: 432: 426: 423: 422: 419: 402: 398: 394: 393: 385: 379: 374: 372: 369: 365: 364: 360: 354: 351: 348: 344: 331: 325: 322: 321: 318: 301: 297: 293: 292: 287: 284: 280: 279: 275: 272: 269: 266: 262: 249: 243: 240: 239: 236: 219: 215: 211: 210: 202: 191: 189: 186: 182: 181: 177: 174: 171: 168: 164: 151: 150: 140: 136: 135: 132: 115: 114:documentation 111: 107: 103: 102: 94: 83: 81: 78: 74: 73: 69: 65: 60: 57: 54: 50: 45: 41: 35: 27: 23: 18: 17: 2053: 2005: 1883:References: 1762: 1746: 1742: 1733: 1729: 1726:enthronement 1725: 1711: 1700: 1680: 1679: 1642: 1567: 1549: 1537: 1528: 1522: 1498: 1496: 1473: 1472: 1462:WP:LEADIMAGE 1457: 1430: 1401: 1351: 1195:WP:LEADIMAGE 1190: 1170: 1161: 1113: 1071: 1031: 988: 981: 955: 870: 849: 798: 779: 743: 730: 709: 691: 640: 635: 616: 611: 590: 560: 535: 495: 430: 390: 289: 207: 201:Spain portal 147: 99: 40:WikiProjects 1458:RFC Comment 1229:Anne Boleyn 1191:RFC Comment 877:Regards, -- 846:Images' use 406:Middle Ages 353:Middle Ages 30:Start-class 2107:Categories 1928:Lead image 1734:last years 1718:his option 1542:two weeks 1540:this image 1515:this other 1173:User:EeuHP 985:condition. 712:succession 2091:Surtsicna 2015:Surtsicna 1416:Dailycare 1370:Dailycare 1263:Dailycare 1233:Dailycare 1199:Dailycare 1126:Dailycare 961:parchment 873:3rd party 119:Biography 59:Biography 1730:full age 1681:Keithbob 1673:WP:ANRFC 1474:Keithbob 1287:this one 1134:Keithbob 1032:reverted 879:LukeSurl 557:Untitled 1626:luck.-- 1572:Kafziel 1407:Kafziel 1315:Kafziel 1291:Kafziel 1130:Kafziel 992:card.-- 680:apoivre 621:Apoivre 619:. -- 593:Apoivre 571:Apoivre 538:on the 433:on the 296:Catalan 1831:helps. 1649:images 1147:Drmies 1132:, and 761:Jmabel 733:Jmabel 717:Jmabel 699:Jmabel 660:Jmabel 601:Jmabel 577:Jmabel 563:Jmabel 36:scale. 2021:Srnec 1902:Srnec 1888:EeuHP 1871:Srnec 1856:EeuHP 1841:Srnec 1810:EeuHP 1785:Srnec 1765:EeuHP 1657:EeuHP 1645:these 1628:EeuHP 1553:EeuHP 1466:image 1435:Srnec 1388:Srnec 1355:Srnec 1325:Srnec 1301:Srnec 1248:Srnec 1214:Srnec 1177:Srnec 1099:Srnec 1077:EeuHP 1047:Srnec 994:EeuHP 965:Srnec 929:EeuHP 908:Srnec 889:EeuHP 871:As a 856:Srnec 852:EeuHP 850:Dear 223:Spain 214:Spain 173:Spain 2095:talk 2083:this 2045:talk 2025:talk 2013:and 1906:talk 1892:talk 1875:talk 1860:talk 1845:talk 1837:WP:L 1814:talk 1789:talk 1769:talk 1732:and 1716:and 1688:Talk 1661:talk 1647:two 1632:talk 1557:talk 1511:this 1507:this 1503:this 1481:Talk 1439:talk 1431:what 1420:talk 1392:talk 1374:talk 1359:talk 1329:talk 1305:talk 1267:talk 1252:talk 1237:talk 1218:talk 1203:talk 1181:talk 1151:talk 1140:and 1103:talk 1081:talk 1051:talk 998:talk 969:talk 933:talk 912:talk 893:talk 854:and 834:talk 820:talk 805:talk 795:Tomb 786:talk 765:Talk 746:john 737:Talk 721:Talk 641:very 636:Avui 108:and 1568:are 1544:ago 1513:or 1402:any 956:not 617::ca 612::ca 530:Low 425:Low 324:??? 242:??? 2109:: 2097:) 2058:: 2047:) 2027:) 1908:) 1894:) 1886:-- 1877:) 1862:) 1847:) 1816:) 1791:) 1771:) 1728:, 1691:• 1685:• 1677:— 1663:) 1634:) 1559:) 1509:, 1505:, 1484:• 1478:• 1470:— 1441:) 1422:) 1394:) 1376:) 1361:) 1331:) 1307:) 1269:) 1254:) 1239:) 1220:) 1205:) 1183:) 1153:) 1128:, 1105:) 1083:) 1053:) 1000:) 971:) 935:) 914:) 895:) 836:) 822:) 807:) 788:) 763:| 735:| 719:| 62:: 2093:( 2043:( 2023:( 2019:— 2017:: 2009:@ 1904:( 1890:( 1873:( 1858:( 1843:( 1812:( 1787:( 1767:( 1659:( 1630:( 1555:( 1437:( 1418:( 1390:( 1372:( 1357:( 1327:( 1303:( 1265:( 1250:( 1235:( 1216:( 1201:( 1179:( 1149:( 1101:( 1079:( 1049:( 996:( 967:( 931:( 910:( 891:( 858:, 832:( 818:( 803:( 784:( 749:k 542:. 437:. 332:. 250:. 152:. 116:. 42::

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index