Talk:Monarchy of Sweden: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:24, 28 February 2014

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Sweden Start‑class Top‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Norse history and culture Start‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

?

The link Swedish monarch at present merely redirects to List of Swedish monarchs. Though that is intented to provide a more extensive article on the Swedish monarchy and provide part of the historical structure.

Historical institutional structure (up to 1974):

Present constitutional structure:

-- Mic 05:24 Apr 30, 2003 (UTC)

Requested moves

King of Sweden → Swedish monarchy - "King of Sweden" is a bad title because the rules of succession to the Swedish throne allow for female succession to the throne. The current heir apparent, Crown Princess Victoria, will therefor be titulated Queen of Sweden. See for example British monarchy. /Jebur 01:01, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jebur forgot to establish the discussion. 132.205.45.148 17:41, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OPPOSE if King of Sweden is moved, it should be moved to Swedish monarch or Monarch of Sweden. The British monarchy article is totally different, and speaks of the monarchy, not just the monarch. 132.205.45.148 17:41, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Monarch of Sweden is a proper title, for king and queen. Mikkalai 19:36, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OPPOSE If the issue is a gender specific title, simply neutralize it as suggested. That's all that's needed. siafu 01:23, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. violet/riga (t) 20:02, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

House of Westling?

When Crown Princess Victoria has children, will they be of the "House of Westling" so named after her husband, or will they adopt the surname of her maternal father and be of the Royal House of Bernadotte?

Previously discussed at Talk:Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden#Last name as married - dynasty change?. —JAO • T • C 12:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Konselj

The sv:Konselj meetings of cabinet and monarch should be described in this article. /Urbourbo (talk) 08:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Monarchy of Sweden

Thanx for good work on the article! With this edit though, the top got screwed up: a big blank space to the right of the infobox and under the hatnote. I don't know how you did that, or how to fix it. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! However I do think it is rather sad that the article in question is so short and lacking sources - for it really is topic in which there's clearly a lot to write about - while, for instance, there are corresponding articles such as Monarchy of Canada where the authors quite egregiously strive to make a hen out of a feather (not to mention the blatant monarchist-POV). I suppose that best road forward-looking course of action is to translate and incorporate elements from the Swedish WP article, which I think is fairly balanced in the sense that it expresses neither monarchist nor republican POVs. RicJac (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Titles of Norway

Monarchy of Norway#Titles and styles needs to be expanded by an expert to the standard of Monarchy of Sweden#Titles and Monarchy of Denmark#Style. Help needed.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 17:48, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

State vs. Government and Kungl. vs. Kungliga

SergeWoodzing have reverted a few of my edits. But this none of his changes are factually correct in either case.
First, state and government are not interchangeable terms as the ignorant Woodzing apparently believes. The English language divide makes this issue particularly tricky in this case as ”government” in US English refers to what in Britain and Europe is known as the state (Swedish: staten). Furthermore, the use of Caps in English and Swedish are not symmetric. It is ironic that Woodzing frequently complains about other editors’ poor use of Swinglish, when he has little knowledge about English capitalizations rules more than his gut feeling. The Use of Caps for State and Government when referring to official institutions or organs is consistent with the usage of those terms in the English translation of the Instrument of Government published by the Riksdag, which is a reference on the article page. Again Woodzing should pay attention to the official translations of official Swedish terminology by consulting "Utrikes namnbok", published by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs which is also made available free of charge on the Internet. The European Union also has similar materials about their manuals of style in all their official languages.
Second, as to Kungl. Vvs. Kungliga: Kungl. Is merely a short form for Kungliga, nothing more and nothing less. In case of doubt, why not have a look at the Swedish Academy’s SAOB ([1]), and the note the usage of the term in the law from 1921 about guardianship of royals below the age of majority.
Has Woodzing at any time ever contributed to Wikipedia by adding reliable or verifiable sources to any of his edits? Otherwise I suspect that he arbitrarily makes his edits simply based on personal preferences and substance be damned. RicJac (talk) 21:24, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 47: / Line 47: @@
 [[Monarchy of Norway#Titles and styles]] needs to be expanded by an expert to the standard of [[Monarchy of Sweden#Titles]] and [[Monarchy of Denmark#Style]]. Help needed.--[[User:Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy|Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy]] ([[User talk:Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy|talk]]) 17:48, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
+== State vs. Government and ''Kungl.'' vs. ''Kungliga'' ==
+[[User:SergeWoodzing|SergeWoodzing]] have reverted a few of my edits. But this none of his changes are factually correct in either case.<br>
+First, state and government are not interchangeable terms as the ignorant Woodzing apparently believes. The English language divide makes this issue particularly tricky in this case as ”government” in US English refers to what in Britain and Europe is known as the state  ({{lang-sv|staten}}). Furthermore, the use of Caps in English and Swedish are not symmetric. It is ironic that Woodzing frequently complains about other editors’ poor use of [[Swinglish]], when he has little knowledge about English capitalizations rules more than his gut feeling. The Use of Caps for State and Government when referring to official institutions or organs is consistent with the usage of those terms in the English translation of the Instrument of Government published by the Riksdag, which is a reference on the article page.
+Again Woodzing should pay attention to the official translations of official Swedish terminology by consulting "Utrikes namnbok", published by the [[Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Sweden)|Ministry of Foreign Affairs]] which is also made available free of charge on the Internet. The [[European Union]] also has similar materials about their manuals of style in all their official languages.<br>
+Second, as to ''Kungl.'' Vvs. ''Kungliga'': ''Kungl.'' Is merely a short form for ''Kungliga'', nothing more and nothing less. In case of doubt, why not have a look at the Swedish Academy’s SAOB ([http://g3.spraakdata.gu.se/saob/show.phtml?filenr=1/132/239.html]), and the note the usage of the term in the [http://www2.notisum.com/rnp/sls/lag/19210159.htm law from 1921 about guardianship of royals below the age of majority].<br>
+Has Woodzing at any time ever contributed to Wikipedia by adding reliable or verifiable sources to any of his edits? Otherwise I suspect that he arbitrarily makes his edits simply based on personal preferences and substance be damned. [[User:RicJac|RicJac]] ([[User talk:RicJac|talk]]) 21:24, 28 February 2014 (UTC)