Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:15, 13 November 2011

Sweden Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lilian

What about Princess Lilian, isn't she Duchess of Hallandia?
--Ruhrjung 11:56, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Adding a note about that.. -- Jao 12:24, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Article not very good

The article needs a clean-up of Swenglish, fact corrections ("younger sons" is BS), expansion (more than half are missing) and a different attitude (including women, for example). I am beginning by moving it to Duchies in Sweden and will then try to make time to fix it up as fast as I can, step by step. SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done The article has been updated and its list has now been completed according to information given in bios on sv.WP and en:WP and now includes pre-1772 persons and all the women. I have shortened the listings to exclude superfluous/voluminous information readily available through linked names. Please help by looking for typos! SergeWoodzing (talk) 07:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Small lands equals Smallands?

The article of the province in question correctly gives an English exonym for its name as "Small lands". Here I added it as the Smallands to the province heading. I havve seen that name format several times in English literature, some of it older. This has now been removed with no reason given. I am reinserting it with the exact wording in the province article's lede and ask that this be discussed here before it is changed again. SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I had removed "also known as the Smallands" from a header because it is not really true. If the term can be found in older English literature, it is antiquated now, and not likely to be understood. Woodzing has added many other strange exonyms to this article, some ("Vermillandia") seem to be of his own invention. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

For some background on these personal accusations, see Kuiper's recent work here about what is or isn't Latin. Neutral editors: Since when do we censure what is "found in older English literature" as "antiquated now"? Unless we are acting on a personal agenda that is not constructive? SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Removal of cross-reference

One cross reference (only) was now singled out for deletion after the discussion just above and my subsequent adjustment of that cross-reference. I see no need to do that, which only defeats the purpose of all the article's cross-referencing. Reinstating. SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

The ducal titles in Latin are well known. Hälsingland is "Helsingia" in Latin and "Wermelandiae dux" is a title, but "Vermillandia", "Elsinland", and the rest may not exist. I suspect they are Woodzing's own witty inventions. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Those versions are the product of extensive expert research in Upsala, and with those county governments in Sweden, years ago. That I have from a reliable personal source, which refers to an extensive published bibliography on the subject, and which there is no reason to question. They have also all been published (not by me), so they exist as exonyms as per WP guideline, which is enough for their inclusion here. Anyone who wants to add more should feel free to, for maximal clarity for all readers.

I am now asking you again, Pieter Kuiper, once and for all, to leave me alone and stop harassing me with your uncivil accusations and ridicule. Please do not edit any of my work! I never edit yours except to reply to your incessant attacks on mine, always with your unwarranted, unsubstantiated and snide comments about what you "suspect" about my "witty inventions" and such, on and on forever. I make a few mistakes like everybody else. Please leave it up to others to help me correct them in a civil and helpful manner (from which I can learn to do better). Neither Wikimedia Commons, after your current block there expires (?), nor English Misplaced Pages (where you only edit to attack me) will suffer any considerable damage if you leave me alone. PLEASE! SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

1) The duchies do not have county governments. 2) Woodzing's references to "extensive expert research" and "reliable personal source" are impossible to check. 3) Even if "Elsinland" was used in some old English book for Hälsingland, the section heading does not provide clarity for any reader. All modern usage seems to depend on Woodzing's wikipedia entries. 4) Woodzing clearly needs to be reminded of WP:OWN and of the small print: "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:35, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

All the county governments in Sweden have historical researchers who will or will not confirm the name variants (Latin and English as well as Swedish) of the ducal provinces covered by their areas today. Millions of people read old English books and have use for such cross-referencing clarity on en.WP. More specific references (I have added several now) are forthcoming as soon as I have more time. I'm glad to have my writing edited, but not by the only 100% uncivil editor I know of whose main objective is harassment and ridicule of a host of others. SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I can't find any English-language sources for Elsinland. I see mentions of "Elsin land" in Spenser's The Faerie Queene and one other old book, but it's not clear what that refers to. SergeWoodzing, what is the name of the published bibliography you mention? Can you cite any sources for Elsinland at all, including Swedish ones? Thanks. 67.117.130.143 (talk) 17:37, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for a cordial question! No, not at this time. I know I have seen it. Give me a week or two, if possible! SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

PS: when I saw it, I reacted to it because it matches Elsinore and Elsinburg (Helsingborg): all three begin the same in Danish/Swedish. SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:42, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

No, that is not the right order. There is every reason to suspect that anglicizations like Sonny Cisco are just Woodzing's witty inventions. I suspect that Elsinland is a similar case. Not to be disseminated by Misplaced Pages. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Sonny Cisco is an uncontestably correct translation to English of the Swedish name Suke Sik and thus warrants a cross-reference, I think. That's all there is on that name. And there is nothing "witty" about that nor about your continued sarcasm. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:14, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Such a "translation" is just a private pun, and should not be included in an encyclopdia. If Mr. Sik was named after the fish (uncertain), translations like Peled or Lavaret would be more accurate (but lacking in alliteration). Anyway, I still suspect that Elsinland is a similar witticism, made up by SergeWoodzing. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

It is my policy only to discuss translations to English with people who are knowlegeable and preferably have English as a first language. Kuiper belongs to neither category and makes lots of translation errors (that are not typos), due to lack of knowledge, but never apologizes when proven wrong (which I have done three times this week). He just finds new things to make erroneous complaints about. That's what makes it so traumatic to be stalked by him for years. SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:13, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Seperating

Does anyone one want to just seperate all these titles into seperate articles and have this page be a list of links to those articles?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 12:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

None of these titles have had any real meaning since 1634, when the Län of Sweden were created as the administrative structure. It is just a list of the Provinces of Sweden, which Gustav III used for creating fancy titles. So there has never been a "Duchy of Delecarlia", all that existed was a royal title "Duke of Dalarna". And in contrast with the UK, the news media in Sweden practically never uses such titles to refer to royals. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 14:54, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

No, "practically never" is not accurate. Seldom OK. And the royal court uses them every time these people are mentioned, their court departments are named thus and their royal coats of arms bear their provincial heraldry.

I don't see the benefit of making separate articles (what am I not getting?), nor are these titles important enough today to so do. They were quite important until 1618. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:00, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

hereditary

Most duchies and dukedoms are hereditary, I know the article says they are not hereditary now, but have they ever been? This should be in the lead. Also, technically there is a difference between a duchy and a dukedom. a duchy is a fief or estate of a Duke, it the title has no land connected to it, then it is just a dukedom. 98.206.155.53 (talk) 07:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Technically, the duchies of the sons and grandsons of Gustav Vasa were hereditary, but either the dukes died without heirs or seized the crown themselves, so they were never passed on. I can't remember the status of the medieval duchies, but Swedish fiefs were generally not hereditary.

Anyway, I think this article would benefit from separating the medieval and early modern duchies from the modern dukedoms.

Andejons (talk) 08:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Category Nobility

Only one Swedish nobleman was ever made duke, the rest were all royals. That one single duke does not warrant categorizing the article as Nobility of Sweden in my opinion. SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Anachronism reintroduced by Woodzing

Woodzing restored an anachronism that I had removed. Without giving a reliable source for the existence of a ducal title in 12th century Sweden. It is yet another example of Woodzing trying to introduce his own original research. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 12:16, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

False acusation. I have never asserted there was any "ducal title in 12th century Sweden", merely noted that one academic Church of Sweden source has claimed there was. See pertinent discussion! SergeWoodzing (talk) 19:18, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Even if Boraen would be an important historian (which he's not), claims that he found notes about a ducal title in a now lost archive (which would that be?) are just silly. Both Nationalencyklopedin and Nordisk Familjebok has Magnus Birgersson as the first bearer of that title. If Boraen actually could claim to have used archives, Sune Sik (not "Sonny") would have been mentioned.

Andejons (talk) 20:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I have reworded this now so that it is clearer that it is a theory worth mentioning, but had nothing to do (as far as we know) with lost archives. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I have removed it again. It is not worth mentioning. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

The section needs a bit of editing following the (fully justified) deletion to make sense. — Robert Greer (talk) 14:50, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

The article is in a sorry state. As to history, already Birger Brosa referred to himself as "dux" in Latin texts. That is the translation of the position of jarl. It has nothing to do with any duchy, and it would be strange to describe the jarl's spouse as a duchess. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Professor Svanberg expounds extensively on this in his distinguished book about royal images of the period, and that's good enough for me. Dux in English can just as well be Duke as Jarl in a global perspective, rather than purely Swedish thinking. SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:34, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

This article, however, deals with a problem that is specifically Swedish. — Robert Greer (talk) 18:08, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, the problem being that Swedish "jarl" not "hertig" has been used in modern times for Latin dux for anyone prior to Birger's sons. Svanberg's treatment of the subject motivates that Birger's wives were each known as "Duchess of Sweden" and even describes Birger's coronet as that of a duke as per contemporary standards then. The argument could be made that, in every instance where a Swede was called dux before Birger's sons, the most appropriate translation to English would have been duke, and that jarl actually (though the meanings have drifted apart with time) corresponded to English earl (not duke), which was a powerful title in Scandinavia then. SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Please respect this request! SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:52, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Hypocricy. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:15, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

• Start-Class Sweden articles
• Mid-importance Sweden articles
• All WikiProject Sweden pages