Talk:Brunswick–Lüneburg

Untitled

I removed the sentence about the "Republic of Brunswick". This so-called republic was declared after World War I by a communist splinter group. It existed just for some days or so and is hardly relevant in this article. -- Baldhur 16:52, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I would consider "Republic" the English word for "Freistaat". "Freistaat Braunschweig" was the official name of Brunswick during the Weimar Republic. --Chl 22:50, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

BTW, I am not sure if this should still be on the "Brunswick-Lüneburg" page. It was called "Brunswick" after 1815, but then it seems like unnecessary complexity to have separate pages for "Brunswick-Lueneburg" and "Brunswick (state)." Is there any rule about how to deal with minor historical name changes in Wikipedia? --Chl 22:50, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Brunswick (state) can be made a separate article. It is not identical to the previous state but just one of the successor states (although the only state to survive). So this is not only a name change.

Now I get your point concerning the republic. Anyhow, I think it is quite confusing to have a Brunswick Republic inside the Weimar Republic, so I would prefer to call it "Free State" or just Brunswick. -- Baldhur 23:06, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Mix of English and German

What would be the proper name for this article is a redirect to this, a mix of the English Brunswick with the German Lüneburg. Lüneburg in English is Lunenburg. It is either Braunschweig-Lüneburg or Brunswick-Lunenburg. Indeed, the Canadian town of Lunenburg uses the English form of the name of the German family. Charles 21:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

The above comments are not correct. The usual form of the name in English is "Brunswick-Lüneburg", anomalous though that might be! Silverhelm 04:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC).

Map needed

This article needs a map. Badagnani 07:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

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 consensus for move --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

---

• Brunswick-Lüneburg → Brunswick-Lunenburg

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. Brunswick-Lunenburg ceased to exist in 1806 and the "Brunswick" half of the name is in English but the Lüneburg is in German. Although the article on the town correctly lies at Lüneburg, the historical state should use the English name (source of other Lunenburgs in English). — AjaxSmack 02:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

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 Per nomination and per my support of this passage of WP:NC(GN) which I feel has always resulted in the best location for articles. Charles 02:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
• Can we have some evidence of the relative usage of these two terms? WP:UE says nothing about using a name that is "more English" because it uses an exonym - the name to use is the one most used in English (what could be more English than that?). Please show us that Lunenburg is used more in this case. Knepflerle (talk) 18:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  • The only evidence provided so far has shown usage contrary to the request, so Oppose Knepflerle (talk) 19:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose, no need to confuse users with a discrepancy with Lüneburg 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) 22:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  • WP:NAME is policy; it says to use English. Those who wish to change policy should take their objections there. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Are you serious? You know fine well Lüneburg is English! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Lunenburg is the English name for the other half of the name of this historical duchy. Charles 21:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
        • Lüneburg is called Lüneburg as well as Lunenburg ... it's simply untrue to say or imply that either aren't used in English. Not sure where you both are trying to take me here ... I'm still sticking to my original comments. Also, I look very poorly on trying to imply as PMAnderson did that Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) and WP:NAME are the same, when one is described as policy the other as guidelines (despite the fact WP:NAME isn't relevant!). Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. Should match Lüneburg obviously. Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

• Are you serious? Really, no. If you're going to start arguing for consistency then I guess we need to have an article on the Oswiecim concentration camp. There is no requirement for consistency. If you'd read WP:NC(GN) you'd see the note about names for non-existing territories. Charles 20:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

• Also, if you want to speak of "matching", why not change Brunswick to Braunschweig? Really now... Charles 20:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

• Strongly Oppose. Recent English sources do not use "Brunswick-Lunenburg" - that form is archaic and can only be found in older sources. Note 26,600 google hits for "Brunswick-Lüneburg" outside of wikipedia, compared to only 4,970 for "Brunswick-Lunenburg." john k (talk) 21:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Move to "Duchy of Brunswick-Lüneburg"

In order to conform to the usual convention, e.g. see Holy Roman Empire task force page and Wiki practice, I propose we move this article to Duchy of Brunswick-Lüneburg. Other examples include: Duchy of Schleswig, Duchy of Saxony, Duchy of Prussia, Duchy of Pomerania.

This is also in line with de.wiki whose equivalent article is Herzogtum Braunschweig-Lüneburg. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

No objections in nearly a year, so I have moved it. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:47, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Charles II

The description of events in this article related to Charles II (1804 - 1873) and the Principality of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel seem inconsistent with those in his his own article and the article on the Duchy of Brunswick. 2A00:23C6:148A:9B01:691F:F623:CF1E:F7D3 (talk) 23:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

missed

Duke Anthony Ulrich of Brunswick father of Ivan VI of Russia 82.200.143.211 (talk) 07:36, 22 May 2023 (UTC)