Talk:List of noble families in Belgium

Belgium Mid‑importance

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Royalty and Nobility

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Royalty and Nobility, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of royalty and nobility 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.Royalty and NobilityWikipedia:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityTemplate:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityRoyalty and Nobility articles

Duplicate list[edit]

This list is somehow duplicated with the list available on this page : Belgian nobility. They should be merged in order not to maintain twice the same list.

Regards. --Apn (talk) 14:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

done --Apn (talk) 21:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable article[edit]

Hi,

Be aware that this article contains unreliable information for the moment. I just checked & cleaned the lists of Princes, Marquis, Counts & Viscounts.

The rest still needs to be reviewed.

Rgds,
Apn (talk) 20:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, i see there is lots of stuff incorrect or not clear. Is not a big issue, but, i prefer a clear soratble table.--Carolus (talk) 22:37, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carolus,

I don't agree with you : It's a big issue. Content of this article is way more important than how it's being displayed. Although I agree, it would be better to present it in a table just like I did for the WP:FR article: [1].

For your information, Zen3500 already started to translate the french article including the table : Draft:List of noble families in Belgium.

That's the correct way to proceed.

Rgds,

Apn (talk) 12:29, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

wel, can you please translate correct and avoid French like écuyer, this should be Jonkheer, jonkvrouw.--Carolus (talk) 13:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jonkheer & Jonkvrouw are dutch words, just like écuyer is a french word. None of them are english words and can be reported either as is in the text (by specifying the origin language) or use esquire which is the english term.

So, no, I won't change this.

Apn (talk) 13:33, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's good news, Apn, that the WP:FR article is being translated since it is quite reliable (although not completely updated: e.g. information from the EPN (2015) is not included, which implies lacking e.g. a second Vanden Abeele (2010), Almásy, Berg, Cerexhe, etc. or higher titles with right dates, as De Bandt only got his title of baron in 2009). By the way, did you know that I used your article as example for mine: List of Dutch noble families?Paul Brussel (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some one who adds clear nonsense like this: "Lots of historical families have been described an studied in the 18th and 19th century, these studies still give an accurate impression of the Nobility in Flanders and Brabant, ancestors of the majority of the current houses", should not be believed at all. Most of the genealogical sources from the 18th and 19th century have proved to be totally untrue and false and 'accuracy' is the last word to be used for these sources (with few exceptions). Unfortunately, this editor bases most of his contributions on Belgian nobility exactly on these sources by lack of reliable and recent ones which has lead to mostly false information on Belgian nobility and their families on WP:EN. Paul Brussel (talk) 17:32, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks (again) for repeating over and over your point of vieuw. I think everyone is aware of this. So there is no need to repeat this every day. --Carolus (talk) 18:06, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]