Talk:Henry the Blind

message: Feedback from anyone?  when we make a custom-made tree we are always "risking" being a bit creative which is allowed for graphic representation, but still... Because of our discussion, and as part of the process of thinking it through, I have made a tree in my sandbox without really being sure if we should use it. The relationships shown are based on my reading of secondary literature which sees the Dukes as important predecessors in the Ardennes area (including Durbuy, La Roche). This presentation also helps show how the two relevant parts of the House of Ardennes link. The two people at the top are Carolingian (and cousins).--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:25, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I was not thinking of the colour distinction as the main message, but I did try to make the colours contrast, and it would be easy to tweak borders to contrast the families in an additional way. (I just noticed the borders are not currently standaridized.)--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:14, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've played with it a bit. Unfortunately I also found a noticed I missed a generation, which makes the tree less neat.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:39, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

text: I should explain that the reason I did not try to list more counts in La Roche or Durbuy is because my reading of Margue is that these relationships (which can be found for example in Rousseau's book about the dynasty's charters) are only speculative. Perhaps it is also worth mentioning that I understand from Rousseau's biography is that the Namur line had been following a policy of linking themselves to the Ardennes, and this is why the showing the House of Ardenne as something linking several relatives seems illustrative of something relevant. There was in fact another link of course, because Henry's daughter married into that old family's line of inheritance once again. In terms of appearance, I kind of like the boxes which I copied off the Hawaian tree discussed on the template talk. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:06, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

text: Reasonable comments. Indeed that peach colour changes function over the generations a bit, and "male line ended" was just the latest attempt to explain without making the tree too complicated. Those are presentation issues, so we can play around. Most urgent is to fix the Ida issue.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess the colour scheme can be interpreted as (1) box style shows the two main county inheritances (2) the colours are used more loosely for anyone associated with either of those two lines? Concerning the dead end lines, a purist solution is simply to add the missing generations but it would make it a significantly bigger tree.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible tree we could use 

message: Here is another attempt. I made it my goal to show the inheritances discussed in the article and how they were redistributed.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 09:57, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Reasonable comments. Indeed that peach colour changes function over the generations a bit, and "male line ended" was just the latest attempt to explain without making the tree too complicated. Those are presentation issues, so we can play around. Most urgent is to fix the Ida issue.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess the colour scheme can be interpreted as (1) box style shows the two main county inheritances (2) the colours are used more loosely for anyone associated with either of those two lines? Concerning the dead end lines, a purist solution is simply to add the missing generations but it would make it a significantly bigger tree.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: draft 3

message: Should we change the article name , , ? For example Henry the blind or Henry, Count of Namur and Luxembourg? The fact that he has a well-known byname seems to be something we should make use of to avoid confusion? He was the count of two important counties, and at the time Luxembourg was not necessarily the most important. Nor is it clear what the numbering system refers to. The numbering system we are using does correspond to one used by Michel Parisse in his very often-cited article on the House of Ardenne, but in the context of that article it refers to a number of family-leading Henrys within the dynasty of the Luxembourg (Sigefried) branch of that family, which is a bit complicated and not clear in our articles. The sequence there is Henry V, Duke of Bavaria, Henry VII, Duke of Bavaria, Henry III, Count of Luxembourg, etc. I suppose we can use that system, but it probably requires more explanation on WP. At the moment a reader would need to cross reference somewhere else in order to understand the numbers. I am not sure that the first two were really called counts of Luxembourg though, so I suppose there is a risk we would be over-simplifying? How important are the numbers? I don't think Henry's are normally numbered for Namur. The other one was Henry "of Vianden" who was not really in any main line.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote for Henry the Blind (with the "b" capitalized). The analogy is Henry the Lion. Dr. Grampinator (talk) 16:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

text: I have not read up on Henry, and Google Books search results confirm neither "Henry the Blind" nor "Henry IV of Luxembourg". It is far from clear to me which name is common in scholarship. Surtsicna (talk) 17:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

text: Current title is fine by me, but Henry the Blind also works if the slighting of Namur is getting to you. It does seem to be the usual way to refer to him, but the numeral IV is not uncommon. Srnec (talk) 22:51, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: No the slighting of Namur is not getting to me, and I have the resources at home to trace what the IV means, but the aim has to be clarity for readers as well. I don't think a big explanation about those numbering systems would make the article better. I guess we can do Henry the Blind.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:50, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: An explanation of the numbering could fit in a footnote and would be interesting. Srnec (talk) 22:34, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name