Category talk:People (medieval): Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
(period vs medieval) |
(shift content to Village pump) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Shifted discussion to [[Cunnan:Village pump]] - [[User:Cian|Cian Gillebhrath]] 16:48, 27 February 2007 (EST) |
|||
Umm, so now we are deciding that the [[medieval]] world ends at 1500? I'm afraid that that date is as vague as saying when the [[Renaissance]] starts. I think that we need 3 or 4 main categories: people (ancient)= -600AD; people (medieval) or people (period) = 600-1600AD ; people (modern) or people (post-period) = 1600AD -. I have no problem with the term medieval being used for the entire [[SCA]] [[period]] for the purpose of this category. - [[User:Cian|Cian Gillebhrath]] 11:54, 26 February 2007 (EST) |
|||
* There are many and varied viewpoints on when the end of the Middle Ages occurs. However, IIRC not one goes past 1517 as the end of the High Middle Ages (many have it ending during the middle of the 15th century). If Cunnan is meant to be a reference, then it should follow the standard definitions. Are we intending to change the definitions of other terms in order to provide further confusion to readers--[[User:User 144|User 144]] 17:15, 26 February 2007 (EST) |
|||
* Well, what I was trying to indicate was that I really don't care if people were from the middle ages or the renaissance. I just want to know if they were pre-period, in period, post-period or SCA/recreationist and I would like the categories to match that. While yes, Cunnan is trying to not just be an SCA reference, it does at least have a formally defined finishing date for its concept of "period". The conventional "epoch/era" terms don't. - [[User:Cian|Cian Gillebhrath]] 10:07, 27 February 2007 (EST) |
|||
Latest revision as of 16:48, 27 February 2007
Shifted discussion to Cunnan:Village pump - Cian Gillebhrath 16:48, 27 February 2007 (EST)
