The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Angevins are considered by many historians to be the distinct Royal House that provided the English monarchs Henry II, Richard I and King John?
Current status: Good article
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance 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 the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
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 was copy edited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 10 July 2014.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
Hi there. These days I've translated the article into Russian. Immediately a was kicked around and the translation was nominated for deletion. The core of disagreement is: a) Angevin kings are simply another name for Plantagenets and as such do not deserve separate article; b) Angevin kings of England are a separate historical entity and the article is valid.
Ashec, Angevin literally means from Anjou, and is used for the the Angevin kings because they were also counts of Anjou. Anjou was lost by King John to the French in the early 13th century so it is common practice to consider his son, Henry III, the first Plantagenet monarch. Plantagenet wasn't actually used at all until Richard of York in the 15th century, but it has been applied retrospectively. English WP also has articles for Plantagent branches such as the House of Lancaster (Henry IV, Henry V and Henry VI) and House of York (Edward IV, Edward V and Richard III). All of them are actually the same family, the House of Plantagenet article covers it all well. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, sometimes different communities of historians divide things up differently. If it is typical for Russian-language historians to group all of the kings from Henry II to Richard III into a single grouping (or even to Richard II, then York and Lancaster) then that is the grouping that should probably be followed on Russian Wikipedia, independent of how it is covered on English Wikipedia - they need not be sliced and diced into smaller pieces the same way if there are different historiographic traditions in the two language communities. From an English perspective the loss of most of the French lands by John is an important point of division, but as seen from a Russian perspective where there were not infrequent gains and losses, it may not be seen as a notable division point. Agricolae (talk) 22:41, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
