Talk:Schönhausen Palace

[Untitled]

The result of the debate was no consensus. However, according to evidence on official English pages of German authorities, the English name is Schönhausen Palace, so I moved it there. —Nightstallion (?) 08:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC) Changed on 06:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC) to incontroversial wording.

Untitled

No it absolutely was not. The vote was 3 Support, 3 Oppose (and one of those Oppose votes later modified his opinion in favour of Schloss Schönhausen. Noel S McFerran 18:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Nightstallion said he "moved this to Schönhausen Palace per the official website of Berlin's building lot management. You know, WP:BOLD, WP:UCS, WP:IAR and all that." If his intent counts as a vote, that's 57% in favor of the move -- not quite the 60% threshold but it's not that egregious. AjaxSmack 23:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Six people voted. Of these six, four of them expressed support in the discussion for a name change to "Schloss Schönhausen" (Angr, Charles, McFerran, Mmounties). In addition Nightstallion himself said on March 12, that he supported "Schloss Schönhausen". That is a reasonably clear consensus for "Schloss Schönhausen". Noel S McFerran 23:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I tried to change things back to Chateau Schönhausen (which I personally don't like), but an admin named Freakofnature changed things back. I don't think this page should be changed without a Wiki consensus (which seemed to be developing for Schloss Schönhausen). I do not understand why two editors who had not been involved in the discussion changed things. Noel S McFerran 19:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I have explained my reasoning. The vote was inconclusive, but two other votes on related topics were clear. Add the fact that there is an official English name for the building, and it's quite clear why this page has to be at Schönhausen Palace. I agree that it was not quite right to write "the result of the debate was move"; I'll rectify that. —Nightstallion (?) 06:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Absolute nonsense. There was a clear majority in the debate to move this page to "Schloss Schönhausen". Votes about name changes on other pages do not override a vote on this page about its name. On one of those pages the vote was 2 Support, 2 Oppose; how exactly is that a clear vote? I understand that Nightstallion thinks that this page should be named "Schönhausen Palace". But that doesn't mean that he can just ignore a vote on this page. Nightstallion: please change it back. Just because you're an admin, doesn't mean that you can ignore a vote. Wikipedia is not a dictatorship where you get to unilaterally decide things. Noel S McFerran 09:01, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

The same holds true for the moves to Paretz Palace and Charlottenhof Palace. They should be under "Schloss Paretz" and "Schloss Charlottenhof" for the same reason that Schönhausen should be under "Schloss". There certainly was no consensus to move them, not on their talk pages and not inferred from this one. --Mmounties (Talk) 01:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Mmounties that there was not a voting consensus for a change to Paretz Palace and Charlottenhof Palace. I did not cast a vote in these cases, since I was undecided. There does seem to be some significant use of the term "palace" for these buildings (as opposed to Schönhausen where the use of "palace" is much less common). Noel S McFerran 04:10, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Chateau Schönhausen → Schönhausen Palace - I believe there was a slight error in the translation of schloss to chateau. Chateau is a French word applied to French structures. Schloss is different and is translated as chateau only in French and into palace or castle in English. The foundation that cares for Schönhausen is that which cares for Prussian *palaces*. Keeping it at Chateau Schönhausen is akin to Schloss Versailles or Chateau Buckingham. Charles 05:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

---

• Support See above Charles 05:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose See discussion below. --Mmounties (Talk) 00:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose I agree with Charles that "Château Schönhausen" is not appropriate in English Wiki, but I prefer his other suggestion below that the article should be renamed "Schloss Schönhausen". A Google search shows that this is by far the most commonly-used form of name in English-language works. (47 English hits for "Schloss Schönhausen"; 13 English hits for "Schönhausen Palace"; 2 English hits for "Château Schönhausen" both this Wiki page). Noel S McFerran 01:17, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Strongly support For this one, there is usage. Septentrionalis 02:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose moving to Schönhausen Palace, but I would support moving the article to Schloss Schönhausen. See my comments below. Angr/talk 17:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support and oppose "Schloss/Schloß Schönhausen". Use English for English Wikipedia. AjaxSmack 01:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

As above Charles 05:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Chateau is defined as a small palace. It is used in English to describe just that. Just because the Germans only have one word for a building that a ruler has lived at some point and call them all Schloss does not mean that they are all palaces. Palaces are by definition palatial. For that very reason, your argument is off the mark as Buckingham Palace is a palatial structure and certainly qualifies as a palace. To call Schloss Schönhausen a palace would be to mislead readers. It is nowhere near big enough to be considered palatial. --Mmounties (Talk) 00:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

You just said a chateau is a small palace. By calling this place a chateau, you concede that it is a palace. Schloss to palace is not misleading. Schloss means palace or castle. This building is closer to palace than castle. It is palatial due to its composition and former use. Versailles is palatial, it is a chateau. It is also French. Sansoucci is small and it is considered a palace. I am a native English speaker and I can tell you that hardly anyone uses chateau outside of French structures. Charles 00:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

The Wikipedia category for German palaces contains many structures at articles title "Schloss" as well as ones at "Palace", to reflect what Mr. McFerran states in his opposition explanation. Charles 01:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it isn't clear at all what to call Schloss Schönhausen in English, which is why I'd support just using the German name. Part of the problem is that at the time it was built, it was in the country (like a château or a country house), but today it's within the limits of the capital city, and it's a former dwelling of a monarch (like a palais in France or a palace in England). And while we're discussing the translation of this article, I think "turnaround" is not a good choice as a translation of Wende, not least because the Wende is never called "the turnaround" in English. How about simply "after German reunification"? Angr/talk 17:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Leaving it at Schloss I would have no problem with. I knew "Turnaround" wasn't that great. It was just a first stab at it. I'm not sufficiently familiar with that period and assumed that the Wende had to come before the reunification. If you think "after German reunification" does it, it's fine with me. --Mmounties (Talk) 17:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Note also

Talk:Chateau Paretz and Talk:Chateau Charlottenhof. It appears so far that Schloss would be suitable for all three. Charles 18:11, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Old talk

Such a long article for such a trivial structure. --Ghirla | talk 08:59, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh come on.... I don't think it's fair to call the structure trivial. Gryffindor 15:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

At least the article wasn't edited to express such an opinion ;-P Charles 18:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

You gave me a chuckle there! Nice going, Charles. --Mmounties (Talk) 03:36, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Use of chateau

The translation for schloss into English is castle or palace, not chateau. That is what it may be called in French. If anything, this page should be moved to Schloss Schönhausen rather than establishing a weird orgy of three languages. Chateau is fine when speaking of Versailles or Vaux le Vicomte, not for German "chateaux" which are either castles, palaces or mansions. Charles 05:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I support calling it "Schloss Schönhausen", as well, per the above arguments. —Nightstallion (?) 18:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

The term "chateau" comes closest to describing this Schloss, because it would be too small to count as a true palace. Chateau however is a French word as well. In cases were translation is difficult or warps the issue, maybe it's best to leave it at the original German name and post a discussion on the English-German translation forum. Gryffindor 15:55, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Consensus reached

Looks like the consensus is to move the article to "Schloss Schönhausen". Charles, please confirm your agreement. If you do, I will effect the move tomorrow night of this as well as the other two articles with the same issue and make the appropriate changes to the article texts. --Mmounties (Talk) 01:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the movement, thank you. Charles 02:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I concur with the move to "Schloss Schönhausen". BUT there is no such consensus with any name change for Chateau Paretz and Chateau Charlottenhof. They are different issues.

I know that some people would like to have consistency with the names of such entities (or similarly with the names of nobles). I do not believe that such consistency is possible UNLESS we ignore the inconsistencies of published scholarship. It is not Wikipedia's role to change the standard way things are named in English. An encyclopedia does not engage in original scholarship; it merely collects what has already been published. Noel S McFerran 02:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Charles. Noel, I agree with your statement. We should not try to create consistencies where there are none. And we are not trying to do that here. As such, we don't propose to not translate the word Schloss when it is used to describe a building that qualify as a palace or a castle because of use and size and location, etc. So, for instance, my latest work in process, New Palace (Neues Palais) is rightfully translated using the word "palace". What we do want to do, however, is treat similar situations similarly. The reason we should treat Chateau Paretz and Chateau Charlottenhof the same is that the issue here is nearly identical to the one we discussed on this page. They were originally country Schloesser, occupied part of the year by a ruling family, and don't have the size to qualify as palaces. Ergo, there is no need to take up everyone's time again just to have the same discussion again. --Mmounties (Talk) 03:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I moved this to Schönhausen Palace per the official website of Berlin's building lot management. You know, WP:BOLD, WP:UCS, WP:IAR and all that. ;) Hope that's okay. —Nightstallion (?) 08:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Schönhausen Palace. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.innovations-forum.net/arch_hefte/DEV-Innovations-Forum_2-2003.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110709011840/http://www.delphic-games.com/english/03games/chronology.htm to http://www.delphic-games.com/english/03games/chronology.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:17, 7 December 2017 (UTC)