This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Catalonia and Catalonia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CataloniaWikipedia:WikiProject CataloniaTemplate:WikiProject CataloniaCatalonia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. 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 AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kingdom of Naples, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Kingdom of NaplesWikipedia:WikiProject Kingdom of NaplesTemplate:WikiProject Kingdom of NaplesKingdom of Naples articles
We've got one cited source, a book on coinage, and one external reference not actually linked to any particular statement in the article. To my mind, the article therefore deserves to be tagged as in need of improvement, especially of citations and sources. I have seen many other articles so tagged that were in much better shape than this one. Is there a consensus on this?
Poihths (talk) 18:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ian Dalziel: The wording He served as king consort of Naples, as such being excluded from government. makes no sense. "As such" implies that being king consort normally meant exclusion from government. Moreover, I'm not sure why we are saying he "served" as king consort if he had no role in governing. My change in wording said nothing about any body. Srnec (talk) 01:23, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A king consort does not normally govern, unless declared a joint ruler. I don't like "served as" much either - "held the title of" might be better. My reason for reverting was that "the government" suggests there was a governing body, like the government of the UK, of which he was not part. That's not what "excluded from government" meant. Ian Dalziel (talk) 03:12, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are reading a lot into the word "the", but my real issue is with "as such", which just sounds wrong to me. If the intention is to say that he was a mere consort with no role in government, we should just say that rather than try to say it in a convoluted way. Srnec (talk) 16:36, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is how I read it, yes. I do think "the" changes the meaning completely. I'll try to simplify it. Ian Dalziel (talk) 18:29, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
