Talk:Prince-Bishopric of Liège

I will be splitting this article, so that we can have a different article on the diocese of Liege, both the modern and the history of the diocese which although similar to that of the bishopric, extends well past the dissolution. Benkenobi18 (talk) 19:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Spelling

Should the article be called "~of Liége", in the pre-1949 spelling? See Liège LMB (talk) 17:17, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

we need to split this article

I just realized we are combining two subjects in a confused way: the Princely statelet and the diocese. Will work on hopefully soon.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what was your intention but I feel that you completely messed up the image distribution on February 10. Before your intervention, nearly all the images were correctly lined up vertically on the right, alongside the text. Now, we have images of all sizes inaesthetically packed together somewhere near the bottom of the article. Do you consider that an improvement? --Lubiesque (talk) 18:13, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes of course this was intended to be an improvement, but maybe there are better solutions. You have to look at the previous version though to see that there relative to the article length there are a very large number of images and it became very difficult to insert the map I made, which I feel is needed for the article as part of trying to clarify the difference between the bishop's See and his princedom. I think the solution i used was fairly typical.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 09:23, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm a fan of maps as well but I must say this one is way too big (400px!!!). I supposed you made it that big because of the veeery long caption. The caption should be drastically reduced: (MoS: Captions should be succinct; more information about the image can be included on its description page, or in the main text.). I myself tended to have image captions that were too long; I still have to go back on some of my past edits and shorten them.

Another thing: I'm familiar with the historical geography of the diocese of Liège and I can tell you that your map is way too complicated because it contains too much information (lots of distracting colored lines showing modern borders, linguistic separation, etc.). IMO, for clarity purpose you should eliminate at least the red and oranges lines and keep only the basic information (the diocese before and after 1559). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lubiesque (talk • contribs) 12:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC) --Lubiesque (talk) 12:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Your criticism of the map seems valid to me. I am not sure if I have time to simplify the map (remove linguistic boundary and modern provinces I suggest) and caption for now though it might be possible for someone else. Concerning the other pictures, should we remove some, or how should we handle?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:21, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Extra explanation: that map is being used for several articles, and so maybe this map should be kept for some of those.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:23, 15 May 2013 (UTC)