Talk:Principality of Rügen

Germany Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Former countries

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

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Province of Pomerania (1815–1945)#Regierungsbezirk Stralsund|Regierungsbezirk Stralsund]] Anchor
Regierungsbezirk Stralsund. The anchor (#Regierungsbezirk Stralsund) has been deleted
.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Requested move

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: moved to Principality of Rügen. Favonian (talk) 23:13, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Principality of Rugia → Principality of Rügen – Almost all sources except Wikipedia use "Rügen". E.g., Google Books has a ratio of 49 to 2 (and the latter are Wikipedia derived). — AjaxSmack 00:13, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Support. Makes perfect sense, especially when the sources are in near-total alignment. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:52, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Look, I hate to be a pain and bring up the diacritics issue, but I just went through the first 20 books from your link and they all used "Principality of Rugen" (no umlaut). I know there's the argument about how printer's couldn't add diacritics and we, Wikipedia, should be better than that. But per
WP:V can you please at least show a few sources that use the umlaut (preferably in English)? Jenks24 (talk) 05:36, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
- Well, you read my my mind about the "printer's couldn't add diacritics" (or wouldn't). Google Books doesn't differentiate between umlauted and non-umlauted forms in results but this one has them. I put "Rügen" in the nom mainly because it matches the island of Rügen article here at Wikipedia. — AjaxSmack 16:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the link. I'll go with weak support. I'd prefer "Principality of Rugen", but I don't think rehashing the diacritics argument at every RM that involves them is the way to go to resolve the issue. And, as you say, the proposed title is consistent with Rügen. Jenks24 (talk) 09:13, 29 January 2012 (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.

Danish language?

If it was a Danish dominion, how come they didn't speak Danish there? Cledrupide (talk) 18:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]