 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
struck
One of his problems is not using the tools to benefit the project. He has not heeded the advice I gave on his talk page. Whether at the case request or at admin recall, he needs to heed my advice. And I don't care which. I cannot oppose the Arbs taking up the matter. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
- I may be being obtuse here but I'm looking at this very simplistically. You have someone who's misusing the tools pretty much every single time they use them. I don't really understand why any suggestion that using them more often could be a good idea. DeCausa (talk) 20:26, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ok. Just saw what you put on the arbcom page viz. "He needs to increase his tool use in a manner beneficial to Misplaced Pages." That makes more sense to me...although not sure if that's a practical outcome. DeCausa (talk) 20:36, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
empire
I see your point, but at least the concept of "Empire of Charles V" in history books and scolarship always includes the HRE; basically "empire" in this context does not necessarily mean direct rule or hereditary possession, just like the Holy Roman Empire is called an Empire even it lacks these aspects. If the term "Habsburg Empire" is problematic to have when including the HRE then I think it could be removed altogheter, in fact it's an anachronistic concept.
Regarding the other point I think it's better to use the Burgundian terminology for a couple of reasons.
1)Again it's the one used at the time, whereas the 'Habsburg Netherlands' terminology is anachronistic; during the reign of Charles V the Low Countries/Netherlands were called either just Low Countries/Netherlands or Burgundian inheritance, lands, states, circle etc.
2)It's the Burgundian terminology that encompassed a larger territory even beyond that area (such as Franche-Comté).2A01:E11:17:40B0:F548:E24:DD85:70BE (talk) 09:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, if you want to continue this discussion it should take place on the article talk page, not here. Secondly, I don't agree that reliable sources treat the HRE states as part of his empire. They don't. Your two points on "Burgundian terminology" are also incorrect. What the territory was called at the time is neither here nor there. It's what contemporary scholarly sources call it that counts. Furthermore, Franche-Comté was not part of the Burgundian Netherlands and is irrelevant. the Habsburg Netherlands includes areas not within Burgundian Netherlands and it's simply incorrect to use the latter. DeCausa (talk) 23:35, 16 December 2024 (UTC)