Hi there. I notice that you redirected Giovanna of Savoy to Joanna of Savoy. As the author of the original entry, I do not recall during my research seeing any reference to her being called "Joanna". What sources do you have that she was Joanna? --Roisterer 15:06, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joanna is the English variant of her name. I pondered long, but it would be POV to put her to Italian name. And Bulgarian name... This is a compromise. Suedois 15:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your request. I'll need a little time to research before I can give you the response you want. -- llywrch 21:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in responding to your question, but I wanted to get my facts straight first before I attempted an answer.

First, Ethiopian property law prior to 1907 -- when Emperor Menelik II made the first of a long series of changes to Ethiopian law in this sphere -- does not exactly conform to our expectations -- although it follows a number of expectations we might have. The nature of an estate -- or real property -- varied between the classes. At the top was the Emperor, who possessed rights to a share of the crop & to labor from the peasants -- & could assign these rights to anyone he wanted. Next were the nobility, the ones to whom the Emperor assigned these rights; they were held only at his pleasure, & could be revoked at any time, & upon their death the land reverted to the Emperor for him to reassign. (And as one early European observer noted, frequently were: to paraphrase Alvarez, the man who sowed a crop may not be the same man who harvested it.) last was the peasant, who had physical possession of the land; he could not transfer his ownership, but it was inherited amongst all of his sons, who enjoyed the land thru partible inheritence.

So the basic principle is akin to Celtic practice: inheritence was thru the father, but all sons had an equally valid claim to the property -- & even cousins on the father's side had rights to inheritence. Obviously for succession to the Imperial throne, this posed a serious problem. The Ethiopian solution in the case of Imperial succession was to confine the younger sons & their male descendants in a mountain prison: not only were they isolated from intreguing for the throne at the death of a reigning Emperor, should a ruler die without heir, one could be produced from this prison in short order.

As for the question of clans & their functions -- there were none in Ethiopia, nor were there tribes. Ethiopia is a mixture of many cultures, but the outlook of the dominant culture (the Amharic people) did not recognize official subgroupings -- tribes, clans, or minorities. This changed a bit in the 20th century, but I feel it is a misnomer to talk about "tribes" or "clans" in Ethiopia.

Does this help you at all? -- llywrch 02:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept my apologies for incorrectly labelling your article. Please note that there was an interval of six minutes between you adding the title and my labelling it for speedy; I thought - clearly incorrectly - that nothing else was going to happen. Once again, my apologies.--Anthony.bradbury 16:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I absolutely did not. I restored my edit to what it should have been with the comment left in the previous edit. I'm going to remove "free lord" because it doesn't exist as a title on its own. Charles 18:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about you cease slandering me by saying that I leave misleading and untruthful edit comments. So much for assuming good faith! Free Lord is not a title. It's a quality historically attached to the title of Baron. Freiherr may literally be translated as Free Lord, however, Baron is the established translation. Do not create "new facts". Wikipedia is not for that. Charles 18:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your post of August 4, 2006 on this page is contrary to three Wikipedia official policies: Assume good faith, Civility, and No personal attacks. Please review these policies. Noel S McFerran 21:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You responded to this comment only 29 minutes after I posted it. It does not seem that you have had proper time to actually review these policies. The No personal attacks policy means that you should "comment on content, not on the contributor"; comments such as "Your mind might be one-track" and "why are you disrupting the information by sniding" are contrary to this policy. This is "personally targeted behavior that causes an atmosphere of greater conflict and stress" which is contrary to the Civility policy. These comments were made to an editor who had made a single comment on the talk page. It would be more appropriate to Assume good faith. I ask you again to take the time to review these policies. Noel S McFerran 22:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When creating redirects, especially if superfluous, please remember to avoid double redirects. Charles 16:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dear Charles, what entitles you to call Prince of Norway as superfluous? It is a term used for centuries, some hundreds of years ago. Or, are younot aware what it was used for? Suedois 17:18, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing links to it. Charles 17:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, you are mistaken. Suedois 23:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Suedois

I've added a bit more information about the insignia of the Dukes of Halland, but I'm not really sure if I read your edit correctly that the first arms of the province consisted of "just" three hearts. As far as I can see, the first insignia (used by Niels II and - most probably - by Niels I as well) showed both the leopard and the hearts. Canute Porse's arms only showed three sealeaves but this symbol is later and it was his family coat of arms. I've rewritten the paragraph, but if you have any information about any older insigina, I'd very much like to see it. I've used "Erling Svane (2002): I Skjoldet springe Løver", Odense. Anders Thiset wrote an article about the arms used by towns and hundreds in the Scanian lands in "Historisk Tidskrift för Skåneland" vol I, 1903, but if I remember correctly, he only mentions a provincial arms for Blekinge, not for Halland, so he's not much use here. Regards. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 10:02, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to riddarhusordningen (1626-1919) the head of the family has the primary right to the seat of the family. All male members could potentially take the seat of a family if the head did not participate. Also there existed a system with proxies, which meant that a noble man could represent another family. The classification of nobility is thus artificial. Furthermore, there was a class called the knights class which first encompassed "real" knights, later the decendants of riksråd, and in 1778 the 300 eldest families plus the decendants of commanders to the royal orders.

Also, it is misleading to translate the original names into Finnish in en.wiki which is in English (wouldn't it be more logical to translate the name into English instead? But why translate?) The names you have translated such as Poiju, Hevosenkenkä, Metsästystorvi have never been used in Finnish. It is true that in the 15-16th century they did not exist in Swedish either and they are retroactive creations (except Boije), but the families were made noble by the king who later on gave them these Swedish names. There is also no evidence of the families having been native Finnish speaking at any time, to the contrary.

Knaappiaateli is a term which is incorrectly used in the article. It is mixed with something called ancient or original nobility (uradel).

Lastly, I do not appreciate that you nullify all my changes. As you seem to be an educated person, I would have expected a more constructive approach.

Teuton 09:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The correct term is the Finnish House of Nobilty and correspondingly the Swedish House of Nobility - not House of Knights and Nobility. I was not aware of that a copy paste from the incorrect page to the correct one is forbidden. If so, could you be so kind to make the transfer you have referred to rather than just erase my work. Teuton 09:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Swede,

As many writers have commented to you already, you do not own articles and you should stick to the conventions regarding names. I am in particular referring to the Finnish nobility. You are systematically translating both first names and familynames into Finnish. The Swedish kings had given Swedish names and the nobility was Swedish speaking. You are not able to change that. If you do not like the fact that the nobility in 98% of the cases had Swedish names, then you should not be writing about it. You seem to be at war with most people here and need to change your attitude.

Teuton 18:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My father (and then my brother) is the head of our family, which belongs to the Swedish House of Nobility (or the Finnish House of Nobility). He is allowed, if he wants, to attend meetings at the House of Nobility. However, another branch of our family is claiming to be head. Ahh, politics. This is silly as it is written and recorded right there in the Book of Nobility, which is published every three years, that my father is, in fact, head. Anyway, that's just a small bit of information. I also must add that, at this point, the House of Nobility, which I have been allowed to enter (not just to tour) on a couple occasions is rather biased towards any Finnish influence with money...to put it bluntly. This is rather a shame and is opposite of what Nobility stands for. Again, I must reiterate that the Swedish Nobility in Finland have inherently Swedish last names. So, I'd like to point out that I could not translate my Swedish last name to Finnish even if I wanted to. Therefore, the nobility with Swedish names in Finland will probably keep their names that way. Translating any baronies to the Finnish language and calling it that is incorrect since most of the baronies are named after the Swedish nobility in Finland. I'm sure you and your finnish speaking counterparts can refer to the baronies in Finnish in private conversation, however, you cannot claim in writing that the names are Finnish, even if it's only Wikipedia. Lastly, I disagree that there is no movement towards monarchy in Finland. Whether the Hesse noble wants to claim the throne or not is irrelevant and is just being used to belittle the idea of nobility in Finland. Take away Hesse's claim to his own estate and he wouldn't be laughing. I believe that the extremely racist Helsinki Sonamat is not the best or most credible source. Mhjelm (talk) 20:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you clarify why do you call Helsingin Sanomat racistic? I don't find a reason why would it be worse than any other leading printed media of the democratic countries in Europe. --Gwafton (talk) 18:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New move proposal here: Talk:High_Council_of_Sweden#Requested_move_2 —  AjaxSmack  02:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish, please comment further on possible names and changes of this page here. ~  AjaxSmack  07:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...Sainty, Sjostrom, Eilers and McFerran... European Royals debate. Suedois (talk) 17:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Gustav Adolf, Count of Vasaborg, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Descendants of Gustav II Adolf. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are mistaken, I am not welcoming "personal criticism" or any sort of insulting or rude discussion. I am welcoming grievances regarding my edits to be discussed and sorted out. If this is what you want to do, you are welcome to clarify your concerns. Charles 12:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is entirely dependent on you asking in a clear and civil manner. Charles 12:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please give your reasons for the controversial move of this article on the appropriate talk page. Deb (talk) 20:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this biographical fact -which MichaelSanders rapidly suppressed- explains it enough. Suedois (talk) 01:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Suedois/Vaasapori genealogy, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Suedois/Vaasapori genealogy and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Suedois/Vaasapori genealogy during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 09:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Sudreim claim has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DrKiernan (talk) 10:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Herrainpäivät. Since you had some involvement with the Herrainpäivät redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. The Theosophist (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dynasty genealogy has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 12:56, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Mary II of Hungary has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 25 § Mary II of Hungary until a consensus is reached. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]