This category 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
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
I've been working on putting some consistency in the way these entries are listed alphabetically. I noticed that some entries that have a given name followed by a description, eg., the Old, the White, the Pious, were alphabetized under that description, Old, White, Pious. On the other hand, the majority of such entries were listed under the name. It seems fairly clear to me that this is the way they should be, so I changed the others.
On the other hand, it is not as clear to me with entries consisting of a given name followed by such things as "of Bytom," "of Opole" and the like. I tend to favor the alphabetizing by the given name, but I can imagine that some would disagree.
Nevertheless, it is clear that the preponderance of such listings are alphabetized under the given name. So I think I'll start changing the others--unless I hear some objection. 140.147.236.194 (talk) 15:08, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza[reply]
.svg){kind=small}