Jump to content

Talk:Adelaide of Aquitaine

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2021 and 13 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Marinelise. Peer reviewers: Cohenek.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adelaide of Aquitaine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:39, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring image

[edit]

There seems to be some sort of issue regarding the "legitimacy", or whatever, of an image. The image in question is from a well-known history book written by a well-known author. One of the arguments against its use is that it is "fanciful". The fact that there is [possibly] no other known likeness of Adelaide except this one seems to me to be irrelevant and just about any other image of hundreds, and even thousands, of kings and queens that are included here at Wikipedia would be equally unacceptable under the argument that they are fanciful. Not to mention much of what we accept as chronicled history, etc. For all of the above, am restoring said image (with a caption clarifying the source so that readers can draw their own conclusions as to whether it is "fanciful" to an unacceptable degree). Technopat (talk) 01:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your explanation, Technopat. I should like to start by pointing out that this image is not a likeness; that is one of the reasons why it is inappropriate as the lead image. The more important reason is that it is not "the type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works" as required by WP:LEADIMAGE. You will never find this doodle in a modern scholarly work about the Capetians. We had a similar discussion about images of popes and decided, with a strong consensus, not to have "completely interchangeable, forgettable, and ahistorical" images in the infoboxes. Surtsicna (talk) 09:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Surtsicna. Thanks for your explanation/rationale abt the WP:LEADIMAGE and "strong consensus". Will remove image and leave edit summary linking to this talk page to prevent future "incidents". Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 09:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]