Create topic New topics

Forum

Help me, please!  

Could We Have a "Stuarts" Category in History Please?

 
AlexandriaIngham
Posts: 109
Message
on 01/30/2014

I know there are already a lot of subcategories in History, but is there any chance we could have one for the Stuarts, since there's one for the Tudors. The Stuarts is a major part in English history and I find I'm writing more and more about it, so I'd rather keep them all together in one place. After all, it's a time when assassination attempts on Parliament were made, a king was executed, another king was deposed and there were a few pretenders to the throne.

I understand if you don't want to add one and I'll place my one for today under a different section.

Thank you!

chefkeem
Admin
Posts: 3394
Message
on 01/30/2014

Done. Smile


Achim "Chef Keem" Thiemermann is the co-founder of a pretty cool new platform called...um...er...oh, yeah - Wizzley.com.
AlexandriaIngham
Posts: 109
Message
on 01/30/2014

Thank you! :)

JoHarrington
Posts: 1816
Message
on 01/31/2014

Why did I never think to ask for this? -.-   All of mine were shoved into Jacobean and left there!

 

Edit:  Ok, I've moved all of my Jacobean articles into Stuarts, which is a much more comfortable fit to my mind.

I'll update Writing About History on Wizzley later on accordingly.  But I'd like to run something past you all first.  How about if we used Jacobean to chronicle the Jacobites?  I always assumed it was going to be about that anyway, until I noticed no Stuarts.

Does that sound about right to everyone else?   I know that my guide isn't the last word on history for Wizzley writers!

Edit 2:  And I further propose including the Commonwealth period under the heading Stuarts.  Ok, Oliver Cromwell would turn in his grave, but he was a git anyway.  Plus the Stuarts came back.  It would keep things much tidier on Wizzley, even while riding roughshod over the efforts of the New Model Army.  Call it revenge for Galway.


AlexandriaIngham
Posts: 109
Message
on 01/31/2014

I should have asked for it earlier :) I did place one in the Jacobean era and I think I might move it back, since is Bonnie Prince Charlie. But with him being a Stuart too...sometimes history gets a bit messy. I moved a Mary, Queen of Scots into the Stuarts category too because it was about her marriage to Henry Stuart, so I see that as the start of the era, even though it's not quite the period the English think of it as.

I'd second the Commonwealth being part of the Stuarts section. It keeps it tidy, prevents too many categories and Charles II's reign was backdated on paper of 1649 :)

JoHarrington
Posts: 1816
Message
on 02/01/2014

It's mostly me and you writing in there anyway just now, so it's like an in-house takeover of the categories!  LOL

Ok, I'll include the Commonwealth in the Stuarts, though that does involve some lip-biting. The Stuarts most definitely started in Scotland.  In fact, the whole category should include the dynasty per se, to my mind, not just the bit where they took over England.

Maybe if Jacobean was changed to Jacobite, it would really clarify matters.  Could that be done without messing up any existing links to the category?


AlexandriaIngham
Posts: 109
Message
on 02/01/2014

I only placed one into the Jacobean category, which has now been moved to the Stuarts. I'd be happy for that category to just be renamed Jacobite instead--I have a few in mind that I want to cover for James and Charlie when the dates are right.

It's difficult with some of the Scottish stuff. I'd love to put more Mary, Queen of Scots stuff in there, but a lot of it links to Elizabeth I so is in the Elizabethan Era category. Then there are some that link to Margaret Tudor and they fit the Tudor Period category. I'm working on a few about Mary and Henry Stuart, so they'll go into the Stuarts now.

I swear, sometimes I have more problem trying to work out which category to put things in then the actual research and writing! Tongue Out

chefkeem
Admin
Posts: 3394
Message
on 02/01/2014

Jo - I don't think that would make any difference for your traffic. Google recognizes quality writing and relevance, no matter the category titles.


Achim "Chef Keem" Thiemermann is the co-founder of a pretty cool new platform called...um...er...oh, yeah - Wizzley.com.
chefkeem
Admin
Posts: 3394
Message
on 02/01/2014

Alexandria - consider this: unlike in a library, where you'd have to categorize very carefully, so people can find what they're looking for, Google bots actually read your content before showing it in the search results.They look for keywords, synonyms, and context. They even adjust for misspellings.

Which means, your potential readers should find you even if you'd use only "History" as your category. 


Achim "Chef Keem" Thiemermann is the co-founder of a pretty cool new platform called...um...er...oh, yeah - Wizzley.com.
AlexandriaIngham
Posts: 109
Message
on 02/01/2014

Thanks, Achim.

I think the category thing is more on a personal level. I like things organised and set in a way that makes sense. It's part of my OCD. I even alphabetise my herbs and spices...Smile

JoHarrington
Posts: 1816
Message
on 02/01/2014

I was also thinking 'pretty'.  :D


Loading ...
Error!