Now, I have always thought of all the inner planets, as far out as Saturn, as being personal, while the outer planets, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto are generational. I hesitated to argue with someone who was, in all probablility, better informed than I, but remain convinced that my own view is not 100% wrong, even if vulnerable to different framing or definition. I've since checked several sources online. Most astrologers do agree that only Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus and Mars are, properly, "personal planets"...though this website tends more towards my view.
I had not come across this "fact" about personal planets before now. My blog title fits! However, I do still think there's room for some mild argument. Who defines/frames these things anyway?
I've posted, several times in the past, that I believe the positions of Mercury and Venus ought to be attributed far more weight in personal chart interpretation, even to the point when they could be given a place in that Sun/Moon/ascendant short-hand interpretation group. I've never believed that Jupiter and Saturn are not "personal" though. For instance, Saturn returns are very darn personal, as anyone who has felt their influence would attest!
I guess it all rests on how one or other of us defines "personal", and on whether textbook rules are to be considered chiseled in stone.