 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Lindestz?
edit"John Lindestz Lindeman" is atypical. One would expect "Lindesz" or "Lindetsz" ("-sz" is short for "-szoon", the Dutch male patronym). Dysmorodrepanis 00:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Beatson and Wathen
editJust follow the link. Wathen wrote : "From this circumstance, Governor Beatson supposed, that it might at one period have formed a high mountain on some immense tract of country now sunk in the water, together with the Islands of Ascension, Tristan da Cunha, Gough and Saxemberg, which constitute a chain of 1800 miles in length, and 500 in breadth." So it is Beatson, and not Wathen, who thinks about Saxemberg as a part of a former continent...as it is written in Beatson's text. Apfelstrudel - 16 march 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.230.80.120 (talk) 02:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
It is absurd to assess the report of a merchant shipmaster approaching to within a mile and a half of the island and seeing a sandy beach and trees inland as "possibly being cloud". Therefore deleted. Geoffreybrooks 7 December 2008
- Outcommented (see source). There was no accurate way to measure longitude in 1809. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 12:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well that is nonsense, because Harrison's chronometer was perfected and widely tested in the 1770's.Eregli bob (talk) 04:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Rupert Gould in his 1945 book Oddities speculated Saxemberg was a cloud formation mistaken by some of the ship captains for an island. So the theory the island was a mistaken cloud formation may not be quite absurd after all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tradermort1 (talk • contribs) 05:53, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
- Well that is nonsense, because Harrison's chronometer was perfected and widely tested in the 1770's.Eregli bob (talk) 04:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Longitude
edit28 degrees west is a huge distance from 19 degrees west.Eregli bob (talk) 04:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Name?
editI have two maps both use the name Saxemburg. Any reason Saxemberg is used today? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.112.89 (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Assuming it's not general sloppiness, see fictitious entry. — LlywelynII 07:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Sources for future article expansion
editPretty thorough 2 page coverage of Saxemberg/Saxemburg here. — LlywelynII 07:53, 16 January 2023 (UTC)