Talk:12th century

This article is rated List-class on Wik.ipedia.Pro's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Years Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wik.ipedia.Pro. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWik.ipedia.Pro:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. History Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wik.ipedia.Pro. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWik.ipedia.Pro:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wik.ipedia.Pro. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWik.ipedia.Pro:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Does anyone object to or is there a Wik.ipedia.Pro policy against my arranging the names in the People section so that they are easier to locate? 76.123.208.229 (talk) 20:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that (approximate) chronological order would be better than alphabetical. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking in terms of ease in locating a given name before deciding to add it oneself. A chronological order would not solve this problem as one would still have to search through the whole list to find a given name. And dates would have to be added to all the entries. What date? Birthdate would be logical, but what if this date is not known? 76.123.208.229 (talk) 14:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a significant historical event and I believe it should be deleted. Caeruleancentaur (talk) 07:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am deleting it. Caeruleancentaur (talk) 16:11, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the anniversaries of deaths should be included, e.g., David the Builder. If we include him, we'd have to include the deaths of all the important people and the list would become unwieldy. Those who want to know the date of death can check under the person's own article. Caeruleancentaur (talk) 16:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, with the dates of monarch's reigns. If we included those dates of every monarch in the twelfth century, the list would quickly become unwieldy. Again, those interested can check under the monarch's article. Caeruleancentaur (talk) 16:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• 1158: Duke Vladislav II is rewarded with an hereditary crown by Frederick Barbarossa for his aid against the Italian cities.

I removed this entry. The link takes one to Vladislav II of Wallachia who ruled in the 15th century! There is no information about this event in the article on Frederick Barbarossa. Perhaps the person who made the original entry can check the details and restore the entry with correct references. Caeruleancentaur (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following is from the article on Al-Adid:

"When Al-Adid died of natural causes in 1171, the Fatimid dynasty ended to make way for the Ayyubids (1171-1260), a dynasty named for Saladin's father Ayyub (Job)."

That doesn't sound exactly like Al-Adid was deposed. More like Saladin waited for him to die, then took over. Perhaps someone can clear this up. 70.161.208.216 (talk) 06:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the reference to a meeting in 1119 between David and Baldwin as there does not seem to be any historical importance to the meeting. Caeruleancentaur (talk) 19:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]