Talk:Landgraviate of Hesse-Kassel

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
	This article is supported by the Holy Roman Empire task force.

Germany High‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Augustus Alt

Augustus Alt Posting (from Australia)

The first Surveyor-General of New South Wales, Herman Theodore Augustus Alt, accompanied Captain/Governor Arthur Philip on the First Fleet to settle New South Wales (Australia), leaving London in 1787. Augustus's father, Jost Heinrich (later anglicized to Just Henry), was born in 1698 in Kassel, Germany, and was confirmed in 1712 according to the Altstadter Parish register. His father, Augustus's grandfather, was Gerhard Alt who 'had special qualifications in writing and arithmetic' and was described in 1713 as a 'Writer in the Government Service' in Kassel, and in 1733 held the position of Archivist. Jost Heinrich followed his father's footsteps and entered the service of the Landgrave of Hesse Kassel in 1720 and was appointed Writer to Major-General von Diemar, Hessian Envoy Extraordinary in Sweden. Accompanying von Diemar to London, he became Registrar of the Legation in 1725, Secretary in 1727 on von Diemar's recommendation at which time he assumed responsibility for all drafting, ciphering and deciphering of correspondence, Private Secretary in 1734, Counsellor of the Legation in 1740, Minister for Hesse in 1741 and in 1760 he was made Privy Counsellor. He died on 9 November, 1768 and his will and administration is to be found in the archives of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury (U.K.) attested on 14 December, 1768 by 'H.T. Augustus Alt' and 'C. Murhard'. The title `Baron' assumed by Augustus in later years was initially attached to Jost Heinrich according to family tradition although according to the Hessian archives, he never became a Baron of the Landgravate and was not given the title in any nominal or honorary sense that can be traced, titles of nobility being conferred by the Emperor and not the Landgrave. It appears to have been a nickname emanating from within the diplomatic corps which slowly assumed formal status. If anyone can add to or clarify this material, it would greatly assist me. Thank you. Dr Paul-Alan Johnson, Visiting Fellow, UNSW. 25 June 2005

There's no mention abbout count Karl who lived in Hessel-Kassel during 1717!

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was no consensus. —Nightst a llion (?) 09:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1st Requested move

Hesse-Kassel → Hesse-Cassel – Historical German states are usually referred to by their English names, but this article title is a combination of English (Hesse) and German (Kassel). Although the city itself is usually referred to as Kassel in English now, the state is referred to as Hesse-Cassel. Olessi 21:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Support, as nominator. Olessi 19:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as I also wanted a movement of Brunswick-Lüneburg to Brunswick-Lunenburg for sake of consistency. Charles 19:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Consistency is not the issue, usage is (see below for discussion of usage). john k 21:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Usage seems to me Cassel, not Kassel. Septentrionalis 00:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. I'm not sure that Cassel is a true exonym. It's an archaic German form but a move can't hurt too much since it sure looks more English. There's a much better case for Brunswick-Lunenburg since Lunenburg is a legit exonym. AjaxSmack 02:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Most users look for items under the modern/current spelling and do not know that here was an older spelling centuries ago. In Germany today, one speaks of Hessen-Kassel (not Hessen-Cassel). And nobody would be loking anywhere today for the city of Cassel in any encyclopaedia. The old spelling can be added in parentheses.Cosal 04:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Here are Google Books ([1], [2]) and Google Scholar ([3], [4]) results. Olessi 19:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that, in the Google Scholar search, the Journal of Modern History, the leading journal of European history, uses "Hesse-Kassel". So, among my books, do John Merriman's A History of Modern Europe, a standard textbook; James Sheehan's German History 1770-1866, the standard English-language work on that period of German history; McKay and Scott's The Rise of the Great Powers 1648-1815, a standard work on early modern diplomatic history; and various others. That is also the name used by Encyclopedia Britannica and the Columbia Encyclopedia. It is also essentially true that while the translated name "Hesse" remains in general use in English for the region, the anglicized "Cassel" is very rarely used, and the city is normally called "Kassel." It is not wikipedia's job to create uniformity when the usage itself is not uniform. And the standard usage at the beginning of the 21st century is, indeed, "Hesse-Kassel," and not either "Hesse-Cassel" or "Hessen-Kassel." john k 21:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also: looking at JSTOR searches, the American Historical Review (the main American historical journal), as well as the Sixteenth Century Journal and the German Studies Review use "Hesse-Kassel", all in recent articles. The only title match for "Hesse-Cassel" is from the Journal of Economic History. Also note that many of the results for "Hesse-Cassel" in the Google Scholar search come from older sources - one is from 1912. john k 21:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with current usage in English being more important than using traditional English names, which is why I am opposed to a move from Lüneburg to Lunenburg. While the Google Scholar search is even, I was influenced by the Google Books hit discrepancy. However, as always, I do trust John's input, and would be willing to withdraw the move request based upon his advice. Olessi 22:00, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure of what the Google Books notice means. I will say that "Hesse-Cassel" does seem to have been more common in the past, so it's at least possible that old books are influencing the numbers. john k 22:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A note: In German, Kassel was spelled "Cassel" until 1926 [5] -- this would explain the older results. --Chl 03:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, interesting, didn't realize that. 1911 Britannica gives "Hesse-Cassel," BTW. john k 04:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no move. DrKiernan (talk) 09:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Hesse-Kassel → Hesse-Cassel — WP:NC(GN) states: If the place does not exist anymore, or the article deals only with a place in a period when it held a different name, the widely accepted historical English name should be used. The Landgraviate and the Electorate of Hesse-Cassel no longer exist and the historical name applies. The present name is a construction of Hesse with the present English-usage name of the city of Cassel, that being Kassel (I may argue against that, but it is irrelevant here). The name of a present city does not apply to a historic and now non-existing landgraviate and electorate. There was a failed argument for a similar article called the Duchy of Pless which was based around a city now called Pszczyna. The current name (Pszczyna) does not replace the historic name. —Charles 22:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Support As nominator. Charles 22:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support more frequent as far as I can tell and accurate. Sciurinæ (talk) 23:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. I'm not sure that Cassel is a true exonym. It's an archaic German form but a move can't hurt too much since it sure looks more English. There's a much better case for Brunswick-Lunenburg since Lunenburg is a legit exonym. (It was easy enough to copy that from the previous request above). Now that I think about it, I'll propose the Brunswick-Lunenburg move and Brunswick itself. Please link there to participate. — AjaxSmack 02:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The English name that was used at the time must be used. To retranslate it to something else (including the modern name) is bordering on original research.EB 1911 also uses the name "Hesse-Cassel", as does this diplomatic document and various other sources. Only if the name were changed to Hesse-Kassel prior to 1866 would I say "oppose". - 52 Pickup ^(deal) 06:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support as usual present usage for the historic state. This would also justify Brunswick; I am used to Brunswick-Lüneburg, however. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, no need to confuse users with a discrepancy with Kassel article, all because of some obscure "guidelines" a few users have compiled in a shadowy corner. Sick too of unnecessary anglicization that has yielded wiki titles like Hither Pomerania instead of Vorpommern and the like. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 22:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Bizarre indeed to ignore Kassel when considering this. Looking English is not a plus point when the subject is a region of Germany. Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It exists no longer. Also, the present name of a city does not dictate the name of a previously existing state. Properly, the article would describe Hesse-Cassel as a landgraviate centered at Cassel (now Kassel). Charles 01:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're arguing based on the historic German name. But for modern usage Google books shows pretty much an even split between C and K since 1980. And it's definitely Kassel with a K on the map now. Since there's no obvious preference in print, we may as well use the name people may recognise. Angus McLellan (Talk) 02:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1980? Hesse-Cassel ceased to be in 1866. - 52 Pickup ^(deal) 10:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Angus is using 1980 to distinguish recent literature from older literature, not making implications about the date of this region. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OpposeVeliky Kniaz (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- User's first edit; his second was an AFD. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the reasons given by John k in the 1st requested move discussion above. older ≠ wiser 17:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per john k Чарльз - жопа (talk) 03:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hesse-Cassel or Hesse-Kassel

possibly foolishly, I have re-opened the C-or-K naming dispute at Talk:William VIII, Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel#Proposed move (3). If you have a strong opinion either way as to whether we should use the C form or the K form in the articles in question, please express it there. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 09:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be wise to have a discussion here about which form to use, throughout Wikipedia, and then we can just move articles which go against whatever we decide on. For reasons I've already discussed at the other page, I think it would be best to use "Hesse-Kassel" consistently throughout Wikipedia, but I'd rather use "Hesse-Cassel" consistently than have the current mishmash. john k (talk) 20:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do remember that Kassel was adopted (in German) as a spelling reform in 1926 and is therefore an anachronism for all the articles concerned. I think Hesse-Cassel is the natural English for them. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:57, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German spelling reforms are certainly odd things - I don't understand why anyone would want to do such a thing. This would certainly be a good reason, if one was writing a book on the subject, to use "Hesse-Cassel." It's really neither here nor there for this issue, which should be determined by looking at reliable sources, rather than reasoning out that "Hesse-Cassel" makes more sense. Looking at the sources, both names are commonly used in English. Older sources use "Hesse-Cassel" pretty overwhelmingly. Sources in the last 30 years increasingly use "Hesse-Kassel," for whatever reason (presumably because this is what the modern city is called), but "Hesse-Cassel" can still be found. It's really a matter of taste, I think. Perhaps it would be best to do a straw poll, and agree to abide by whichever the majority prefers, if that would be acceptable to you? john k (talk) 06:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the spelling change was a nationalist gesture, to rid German of those nasty French Cs. Coethen had been respelt forty years before, according to the German WP.

Well, a straw poll can do no harm; let's see what people think, and if there is consensus against me, so be it. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:59, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should we put notices up, and such? If so, where? john k (talk) 19:53, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe this discussion or any !vote should be located here on the talk page of the ex-country since, as I noted at the previous discussion, I don't consider it an issue concerning a current geographical name. Rather the issue is the English version of an extinct dynasty's name. If polling is to be done it ought to be done at List of rulers of Hesse, at Line of succession to the Hessian throne, at Category talk:House of Hesse-Kassel, etc. But, I prefer no vote at all, and that the matter be handled by notation the way the discrepancy between the dynasty of Hanover and the former kingdom of Hannover was disposed of in Note #1 here as supported in the move request here. Horledi (talk) 05:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Horledi's preferred option, and his caution about location - although I don't care all that much where a straw poll is held. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, the dynasty is not extinct, it is no longer ruling. Secondly, the issue is what the state should be called. What the dynasty should be called follows from what we call the state, not vice versa. Thirdly, what discrepancy about Hanover? We have Kingdom of Hanover and Hanover for the city. If you want the city at Cassel, that's really a different question from what the historical state should be called. At any rate, my main issue here, and the reason I'm proposing a poll, is consistency - there are decent arguments for "Hesse-Cassel," and there are decent arguments for "Hesse-Kassel," but I can't see any arguments for having some articles use "Hesse-Kassel" and some use "Hesse-Cassel," apparently at random. I don't see how your preferred way of handling "the matter," does anything to address that issue. Nor do I understand your contention that usage in English is mostly about the family - if you look at the examples I gave over at Talk:William VIII, Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel, most were references to the state, not its ruling family. john k (talk) 18:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The city of Hanover was spelled as in German for a while; but we still have the corresponding discrepancy between the city of Braunschweig and the state of Brunswick-Lüneburg, its branches, and their rulers. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:56, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. But I don't understand the distinction Horledi is making between dynasty and state. john k (talk) 01:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The state no longer exists; but the descendants of its rulers still do. (Whether this is the dynasty is a verbal question; but I can see calling the Wittelsbachs or the Romanovs still a dynasty, even if they don't rule.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:26, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The dynasty no longer uses "Kassel" in their title. They use the surname "Prinz von Hessen" (or, in the case of the head of the family, "Landgraf von Hessen"). "Kassel" or "Cassel" has not been used in official titles for the family since 1803, I don't think. john k (talk) 05:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To my understanding, that's a moot point, because the dynasty ruled the Grand Duchy of Hesse after the Great French War, so are referred to as the Grand Ducal family of Hesse. Fwiw, I'm with Septentrionalis on the verbal point regarding dynasty, though; I don'think they still need to be ruling to be considered a dynasty. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 09:25, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Er, no, they ruled the Electorate of Hesse from 1803 on. The house of Hesse-Darmstadt ruled the Grand Duchy. Also, Great French War? I don't think I've ever heard that term before. john k (talk) 13:46, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Outdenting) You're right; I got the two houses mixed up, sorry. Yeah, the Great French War is a term used to conflate the French Revolutionary Wars and the Napoleonic Wars, usually regarding Germany, where the changes spanned the two parts of the larger conflict. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 11:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am told reliably that both forms are in frequent use in English literature. But only one of them is in the English language: Hesse-Cassel. English, please on English WP. Always. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:13, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both of them are of course in the English language. Cassel is the old name of the city, used in German and English; Kassel is the new name of the city, used in German and English. The German form of the state's name is "Hessen-Kassel." This is not a situation like Brunswick vs. Braunschweig or Hanover vs. Hannover. It just took the English language a bit longer to adopt the new spelling. Note also that this position seems to imply that the English name of a place can never change. If that were true, we should have articles at Aix-la-Chapelle, Mayence, and Ratisbon. It also misunderstands what "use English" means. Wikipedia uses the name used in the English language, not the anglicized names. Nobody doubts that if you translate "Juan Carlos" into English you get "John Charles." But because that name isn't used in English for the king of Spain, our article is still at Juan Carlos I of Spain. john k (talk) 21:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Carlos (the current Spanish king) is so named, I believe, in English literature and thus English WP because it is no longer acceptable to translate names of people in our own times into historic exonyms, since their exact spellings have become legal spellings as of about the year 1900. These people only have one legal name and it is not considered correct to call them anything else ever. Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden (previously Charles of Sweden) and Margrethe II of Denmark are two more of many such examples.

Your "of course" was not quite polite. State your case with out being masterful, please! You and I can then agree to disagree like the gentlemen we are. I believe that place names do not become "English" just because it becomes trendy to use endonymic spellings. Göteborg does not become English for Gothenburg just because a few CNN reporters showily try to pronounce it (horrendously inaccurately) in what they think is Swedish and a few Swedes try to push it into our English vocabulary spelled with phonetics that are hopeless in English. "C" is normal English, in a case like this; "K" would be exceptional English and/or endonymic German, in my opinion. History has nothing to do with that. Would you mind respecting my opinion, no matter how vehemently you might disagree? Thank you! SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:52, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how "Kassel" is any more foreign than Mainz or Regensburg. Both were previously known in English by different names. Most place names do not have specific English forms which differ from the native forms. Those that do sometimes lose them, as they stop being used. Wikipedia should reflect actual English usage today, not English usage 50 years ago, or some abstract concept of what "true" english usage is. As far as "of course", my point was merely that "Hesse-Kassel" is a form which is only used in English; it is never used in German, where "Hessen-Kassel" is used. "Hesse-Cassel," on the other hand, is actually a French form as well as an English one. john k (talk) 16:56, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I respect your opinions. But you have also made mine even firmer in this case, by pointing out (perhaps without intending to) that Hesse-Kassel is a totally perverse combination of German and English of the kind that greatly confuses and hampers all attempts at effective communication (can you tell I work with these issues?). In my opinion Hesse-Kassel should never be used by anyone for anything. It's about like Germans calling San Francisco San Franz or Sankt Francisco. Awful! Cordially. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not such a combination, because "Kassel" is the name now used in English for the city. I think my basic disagreement with you here is that I think wikipedia should follow usage in English while you think Wikipedia should determine what the most logical English usage is and go with that. IMO, if standard works of history written in English use "Hesse-Kassel," we have no business using another form because we don't like it. I'd ask you again about Ratisbon. Do you think that is still the English name for Regensburg? john k (talk) 17:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not. I would never suggest we use a totally obsolete term of any kind. Hesse-Cassel is far from totally obsolete, as far as I know.

So, I'll ask you: do you think we should use København? If you do, I'm afraid we'll never agree about workable phonetics. SergeWoodzing (talk) 19:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That seems an odd question. Do you think København is the name used in English for the city? I doubt it. However, I think John K's point is that both Hesse-Kassel and Hesse-Cassel are used in English. The issue at hand is what criteria to use for deciding which to use. In my opinion, the Cassel spelling appears to be fading from common use and is mostly used in a sort of anachronistic synchronicity -- trying to reflect what the common English usage used to be at the time that the state was in existence. older ≠ wiser 21:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Works in English do not use København, with the exception of some atlases that always give the native names. This is not at all the same thing as Kassel, which has become the standard English name for the city, and is increasingly the standard English name for the state. "Hesse-Kassel" is in the process of becoming the standard English usage, in the same way that "Regensburg" became the standard English name for the city previously known as Ratisbon. At what point do you draw the line? It's a judgement call, but I think the balance of usage favors "Kassel." If Serge thinks "Cassel" is standard English and "Kassel" is only the German name, he should go to Talk:Kassel and propose that the city article be moved. john k (talk) 04:48, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move Request

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: pages not moved: no concensus in 19 days. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He means no conSensus. DrKiernan (talk) 14:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hesse-Kassel → Hesse-Cassel — I want to get this question settled once and for all. Up until today, we had the main article and most of the articles of members of the family using "Hesse-Kassel." But some members of the family used "Hesse-Cassel." There is absolutely no reason to use two different forms of the name for members of the same family; what advantage is possibly gained by this? I was bold and moved the articles that were out of place to the Hesse-Kassel form, but since I know that there are strong supporters of Hesse-Cassel, I thought a grand move vote covering all the members of the family would be the best way to finally resolve which form we should use. I prefer "Hesse-Kassel," but I care much more that we are consistent than I care which form we use. I'd just like for us to be able to agree to use one form. You can see the discussion above and at Talk:William VIII, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel for reasons for and against each version: Cassel is the older form in both English and German. The German spelling was changed to "Kassel" in 1926, long after the state had ceased to exist, and German sources now consistently use "Hessen-Kassel" (as do a few English sources). In English, usage remained for a long time with "Hesse-Cassel," but in the last 20 years "Hesse-Kassel" has been considerably more common than the alternative. But please, let's just agree on one name! john k (talk) 14:18, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, On assumption that Hesse-Cassel is english & Hessel-Kassel is german. Afterall, this is the english-language Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 14:30, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mild Oppose - Please read earlier discussions here and at Talk:William VIII, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel. "Hesse-Cassel" and "Hesse-Kassel" are both frequently used in English; Hesse-Kassel has become more common in recent years. The spelling of the city's name in German was changed from Cassel to Kassel in 1926. English has slowly followed suit. Either title would be okay, but it's simply incorrect to say this is an English vs. German dispute. It's a dispute between an archaic spelling that was used when Hesse-Kassel existed and a modern spelling which is arguably anachronistic. john k (talk) 15:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're opposing your own RM request? GoodDay (talk) 15:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I mostly just want consistency one way or the other. My order of preference is a) all at Hesse-Kassel; b) all at Hesse-Cassel; c) all at Hessen-Kassel; d) random mishmash for no reason. john k (talk) 15:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, if most are at Hesse-Kassel? then move'em all there. Alot less comotion that way. GoodDay (talk) 15:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's not about doing what is "easy", it's about doing what is "right". Seven Letters 18:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. With a modern English map, such as the ones on Bing, the reader won't find any Cassel in Hesse. They will find Kassel though. Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support all of these, which do not include the city; as WP:NCGN says, if "the article deals only with a place in a period when it held a different name, the widely accepted historical English name should be used. " Kassel was adopted (in German) in 1926; its acceptance in English is much later, if it is complete now. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:58, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Looking at the dates, there was never actually a state of Hesse-Kassel because the state known (and spelt) as Hesse-Cassel dissolved decades, before the German spelling change in 1920. What we find on modern maps is not relevant because they usually use the local, modern spelling so motorists don't get lost! You won't find Munich or Nuremberg either! --Bermicourt (talk) 19:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Hesse-Kassel seems the most predominant form now used in English. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support as per Septentrionalis/PManderson above. SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Hesse-Kassel is an anachronism. The name is not dependent upon what the city of Cassel is called now. Seven Letters 17:14, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hesse-Kassel is also half English and half German, about like the Germans calling San Francisco San Franz or Sankt Francisco. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Map Unclear

The map makes it unclear where exactly Hesse-Kassel is - maybe there should be something in the map description saying, for example, that it is the country in brown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Williambellwisdo (talk • contribs) 15:10, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]