Talk:Count of Barcelona

message: I did my best to translate from Catalan; some royal epithets need translation; also, I'm not entirely clear on the conventions for what language to use for names of monarchs; I've inclined to Catalan, because these are the Counts of Barcelona, but I notice elsewhere a tendency to translate royal names into English. -- Jmabel 08:29, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked everything and fixed the links. There still are some (inherent?) inconstistencies left but anyway… As counts of Barcelona they are referred to by their Catalan names and numerals but the link is to articles that use their English names and Aragonese (or Spanish, after 1469) numerals. The Aragonese and Spanish numerals take precedence over those used in Catalonia because the royal title always takes precedence over that of a count :)) We should probably explain this in the article (add a bit on naming conventions?) but I'm too lazy/tired to do this right now. We also use Wilfred the Hairy instead of Guifré because such is the norm in English (he's the one early count to be mentioned by everyone writing about the county). apoivre 20:55, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation

message: The last section of the main article makes it sound as if there was a hunt for a successor after Franco's death.  Surely the succession was fixed in 1947(?) when the Royal Family agreed to Juan Carlos I coming under Franco's tutelage.
Also of course, After the second republic and the Spanish State Juan Carlos I is de facto the first monarch of a new Spanish kingdom.   Can anyone have a right to be first, except the first?    garryq 18:18, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The history here is actually complicated and I don't believe my knowledge is thorough, but through much of the Franco era, it was not at all clear that the monarchy would be restored. I gather that for some time it was also unclear whether Juan would, indeed be passed over, although toward the end the matter was certainly clear. This article is probably not the best place to sort out the details; I'm not sure if something in Wikipedia does yet sort this out. Anyway, is there something in particular you want to change about the wording here, or are you just saying it could be misread? -- Jmabel 23:47, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Juan Carlos I

message: The chronology seems wrong on the transition from Ramon Berenguer IV el Sant to Alfons I. The article on Ramon Berenguer IV says he lived until 1162. Does anyone know what's going on? I copied this from the Catalan-language Wikipedia, but they could have it wrong. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:01, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
: RB IV was Count of Barcelona until his death in 1162 (in Italy, en route to a meeting with Friedrich Barbarossa). So 1162 is the right date. Sorry, I must have overlooked this, too busy with all the more obscure dates. --apoivre 18:21, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: possible error

message: The relationship between these names is not clear here, or elsewhere (see Count of Ampurias) in any Wikipedia, Catalan or Spanish.  I created a Sunifred page to try explain it, but I don't know.  There were a Sunyer and Sunifred who were brothers, but it seems these names are variants of one another.  Can anybody clear this up more? Srnec 05:58, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sunyer or Sunifred?

message: NEVER EXISTED.  It is the Crown of Aragon.  Semi-colloquially it was refered to as the Kingdom of Aragon as this was the superior title within the Crown.  NEVER did something exist called the "Catalan-Aragonese Confederation."
Plus, how could on one hand the article be arguing that there was no unified Spanish kingdom until the early 18th century, but then say that the "Catalan-Aragonese Confederation" was annexed by Spain?  Paradoxical.  A none-existant kingdom can't annex another realm.
Let's keep politics out of it please. Eboracum 18:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Confederació catalano-aragonesa is an anachronistic term which you normally find in modern Catalan literature - they think it sounds better than la Corona d'Aragó, putting the emphasis on Catalans rather than the Aragonese. Using it in the article, I didn't try to pretend it was an official term of the epoch, just another way to refer to the entity. I believe it is used in the same vein in English by T.N.Bisson who is definitely a better expert on the topic than you or I will ever be. Frankly, I don't care if you comment this usage out but make no mistake: there is a huge difference between the Crown of Aragon (Aragon, Barcelona, Valencia and so on) and the Kingdom of Aragon (i.e. Aragon proper). Don't try to put this into Wikipedia articles.--apoivre 17:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that it is anachronistic I think speaks for why it does not belong in the article. And the edits I made adress the difference between the Crown of Aragon (a union of the Kingdom of Aragon, the Kingdom of Valencia, the Kingdom of Majorca, and the Principality of Catalonia) from the Kingdom of Aragon.  As such I think that there is no need to further distinguish by saying the "Catalan-Aragonese Confederation". Eboracum 00:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  "The fact that it is anachronistic I think speaks for why it does not belong in the article." - So is the Crown of Aragon but we still use it in the article. And if you are into hair-splitting, it's not the Principality of Catalonia, it's the County of Barcelona (and, earlier, a few other Catalan counties) - the Principality is mainly modern usage as well, yet you seem to have no problem using it. So what's the problem with the Confederation? -- apoivre 02:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm sorry, apoivre, but both Principality of Catalonia and Crown of Aragon are not modern usage. They also appear on documents from that time. Principat de Cathalunya (Principality of Catalonia) was used by catalans themselves on documents addressed to the King of Aragon, during the epoch of the Crown of Aragon. I no longer remember the exact bibliographic reference where I saw it myself (a scanned book in the Cervantes virtual library). According to the  [Principality of Catalonia article in the catalan wikipedia] the term also appears in the Chronica from Ramon Muntaner (1265-1336). It would be modern usage, thought, if you used it to refer to the catalan territories before the forming of the Crown of Aragon, since its principality comes from Ramon Berenguer IV becoming Prince of Aragon. As for Crown of Aragon you can see it yourself in this [scanning of the Chronica] (1558 is the edition year, not the year it was written). It appears as Corona Darago. --Enric Naval 04:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Byzantine Empire is also an anachronym. --Gerhidt (talk) 16:59, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Catalan-Aragonese Confederation

message: I'm going to change the name of the House. See Talk:House_of_Barcelona. --Enric Naval 17:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[House of Barcelona]] / [[House of Aragon]] 

message: Today is popular to find strong women during history which can be used like example for today women, but fact is that:
*Ermesinde of Carcassonne was NOT count of Barcelona, but "only" regent
*Almodis de la Marche was NOT count of Barcelona, but "only" regent.
On wikipedia list of Roman or Ming emperors you will not find regents so without question this list of counts of Barcelona is against wikipedia rules.Analitikos (talk) 15:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: This article is horribly bloated. Section after section telling us who the king of Spain was... Srnec (talk) 01:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bloated