Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History

Old talk:

1. Wikipedia talk:History standards/Archive.
2. Wikipedia talk:History standards/Archive2 (June 2002, apparently, until Jan 2003)
3. Wikipedia talk:History standards (July 2003)

More basic topics?

We need an entry on what is in Latin technically called intitulatio, or the official titles of rulers, especially as used in formal addresses, on coins, and on charters. What do folks think it should be called? Royal titles? Titulature? Honorifics? Honorifics is nicely general and will cover the titles of the elected as well as the royal. 'Intitulation' is an English word (OED sez), but I prefer 'Titulature' if we're going for that stem. --MichaelTinkler

I like Honorifics, m'self. It should also be linked to nomenclature, so that we can get names right in article titles. It's an interesting dilemma, though -- we need to make it clear that honorificas often do not reflect reality, but there is also a demonstrable need for simple translation of abbreviated hon's. Any suggestions for keeping it limited to a manageable scope? JHK

We have an entry above and a table of translated honorifics below? --MichaelTinkler

Hmmm. problem is, lots of them deserve their own articles -- like dux, comes, comes or dux markionis -- that change dramatically over time and from 'country' to 'country'. Ugh. Not saying no, mind you -- just anticipating issues. JHK

Page title

Any objections to moving this to Wikipedia:WikiProject History? Angela. 03:22, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

Now moved. Was previously at Wikipedia:History. Angela. 03:25, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

Categories

This project needs some advice on how to organize historical categories, especially categories to do with the history of nations. Specific questions that need answering are:

1. Do we need to have separate categories for a country and its history? For example, it seems clear that we don't need both Category:Roman Empire and Category:History of the Roman Empire. So do we need both Category:United Kingdom and Category:History of the United Kingdom?
2. If we do need a category for a nation's history, then do we call it Category:History of France or Category:French history ?
3. What to do about nations that have changed name and boundaries? For example, take British history. Should everything go in Category:History of the United Kingdom or should there be separate sub-categories for English, Welsh, Scottish, (Northern) Irish history? Do English events cease to go into the English history category after 1707 or do they continue up to the present? What about events in British colonies before they gained independence? Similar questions arise for almost all countries. A careful hierarchy would solve this, but explicit recommendations are needed so that everyone is working with the same ideas in mind.
4. Are there recommended sub-categories? Should every country have a Category:Military history of X? What about political, economic and social history sub-categories?
5. Should (sub-)sub-categories be created pre-emptively or should we wait until a category gets too big and then split it?
6. What should go into Category:History?

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles#Categories for an example of the kinds of recommendations I think are needed. Gdr 12:03, 2004 Aug 11 (UTC)

Here's a tentative proposal about what should in Category:History:

• Category:History by nation should have Category:Chinese history etc
• Category:History by topic should have Category:Art history etc
• Category:History by period should have Category:Medieval history etc
• Category:Historiography should have articles about the study of history itself (but maybe another name would be better)
• Category:Fictional history for histories of fictional worlds

Almost no articles should go into Category:History itself, except things like History of the world and History. However, this would leave Category:History looking rather empty. Comments? Gdr 12:08, 2004 Aug 11 (UTC)