Talk:Charles XII of Sweden

message: As far as I know the city was called Constantinople until 1930, it's inapropriate to call it Istanbul in an 18th century context.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.226.84.163 (talk) 15:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, they did not.  It was informally called Istanbul in Turkish, but Constantinople remained the official name until 1930.  It was certainly universally used in the west until 1930. john k (talk) 17:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

text: No, Ataturk changed the name in 1930.  Before that it was often informally called "Istanbul," but the official name - used by Ottomans and westerners alike - was Constantinople.  In the west, it was universal to call it "Constantinople."  In the Ottoman Empire itself, it was sometimes called Constantinople and sometimes Istanbul, but the former in formal contexts, the latter informally. Today, a few scholars, primarily scholars of middle eastern history, will call it Istanbul after 1453, but most, so far as I can tell, call it Constantinople down to 1930.  This is particularly true for historians of the west, and Charles XII is a part of European, not middle eastern, history.  And of course, as an encyclopedia written in English, the English Wikipedia is a project which ought to give greater weight to usage in English than to usage in Turkish. john k (talk) 15:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just as in the Byzantine era it was informally known as Stan Polis - "the City" - which is where "Istanbul" derives from. Michael  Sanders 15:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But in any case, the name used in this article should be the name most commonly used to refer to the city in this period by historians. If most, as John says, call it Constantinople, that is the name that should be used. Michael  Sanders 15:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Usage is mixed, and there's more usage of "Istanbul" than there used to be, but Constantinople still predominates, I think, particularly in works written about European, rather than Middle Eastern, history.  If this were an article about Ahmed III, there might be some claim to using Istanbul, but not in one about Charles XII. john k (talk) 15:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constantinople vs. Istanbul 

message: For a reason which has never been entirely clear to me, Scandinavian Neo-Nazis and extreme nationalists celebrate the anniversary of his assassination. Could someone elaborate? Asav 19:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If so be it that he was a patriot and a national hero, why celebrate his death?(88.89.69.32 (talk) 21:29, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Yes we know. The Swedish invasions of Poland, including earlier ones, seems very mysterious to us Swedes, we simply don't understand what the troups should do there, except possibly spank one or another Wasa competitor for the Swedish throne, but the greatest mystery to most Swedish historians is Charles XII himself, who in the long run ruined Sweden by his many meaningless wars. Not starting a war, is no defense for not negotiating peace, but Charles XII was not that kind of king. He was obsessed with wars, irrespective of the consequences. The neo-nazis are projecting their "inner wars" on this mad king. Said: Rursus (☻) 20:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Truly, but his diplomacy was inferior compared to competitors, and it seems that he didn't use the war for the purposes normal at that time: power and riches. It seems war itself was the purpose for him. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 21:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neo-Nazis and Charles' assassination 

message: And we're positive he wasn't not gay? Arthurian Legend (talk) 02:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He was what we say in Sweden: "omåttligt puckad" (circa "nuts beyond reason"), no specific signs of gay, but possibly an Asperger case. Said: Rursus (☻) 20:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Your statements only reflect bad upon yourself. Karl 12 was probably gay and very capable in commanding troops as proven by findings. He was good at tactics, but was not succeeding in long term strategies - he won battles but not wars. The war machine he and his generals inherited was one of the finest of that time and the victories should by a great deal be attributed to its architects and not only to those generals and their king. --Malin Randstrom (talk) 05:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Judging by mo own sandards, he would be an asperger case. You are more straight than all others, but no sexdrive. He would'nt abstain from women, but merely be immune. He would value his sence of cubic mathematics. Though it's not cowardous to keep a safe distance from enemies, he would be to slow to chicken out. More so as his mathematical equations gave no hint on when to duck.  Enough about me, there is a speculated to have asperger section on wiki. I also expected to find Aemonn De Valera on this section, King Charles would be the one who I see as more typical.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.164.222.45 (talk) 03:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hmm 

message: Is it notable enough? If so, where- here or a misogynist-type-list? It's pretty subjective, though can be sourced, both secondarily and primarily (his own unambigious quotes?).  See also: casus anti-semite (extinct- slander?), liberals (alive and kickin'- slander in a large segment of the media market)...? I wouldnt simply write it off as "closet" homosexualism" as some biographers, based solely on his aversion to women, whereas an idealism- not too much unlike Kant's empiricism- is the most palpable cause.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.5.224.52 (talk) 20:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misogyny? 

message: "The Janissaries did not shoot Charles during the skirmish at Bender, but captured him and put him under house-arrest in Constantinople. During his imprisonment the King played chess and studied the Turkish navy.
"
Does anyone have a source for this statement. I consulted the book "Karl XII" by Bengt Liljegren, and he says that the closest Charles personally came to Constantinople was near Adrianople (today's Edirne). Also the corresponding Swedish page mentions nothing about Charles staying in Constantinople. It may seem insignificant, but I want to know. Diupwijk (talk) 18:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any source on Charles' house arrest in Constantinople? 

message: According to this article
The Swedish army of ten thousand men was outnumbered four to one by the Russians
However, according to the battlebox of Battle of Narva (1700), the swedes numbered 10,537 and the Russians 30000-35000. This means that even if the take the higher figure 35000, the number ratio was 35000/10537 = 3.3, closer to 3 than 4.
Moreover, according to this article
...the total number of Russian fatalities reached about 17,000...
whereas the battlebox of Battle of Narva (1700) numbers Russian casualties as 8000-10000.
Top.Squark (talk) 16:02, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictions with [[Battle of Narva (1700)]] 

message: According to this article
Charles had 14,000 men while Peter had 45,000
However, according to the battlebox of Battle of Poltava, the numbers were 30000 vs. 60000. If we count only battle participants, its 8200 infantry + 7800 cavalry + 1000 hussars = 17000 on the Swedish side and 25000 infantry + 9000 dragoons and cossacks = 34000 on the Russian sides. Either way, the numbers don't match.
Top.Squark (talk) 19:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradict with [[Battle of Poltava]] 

message: The skirmish at Bender was at Bender.  "Crowds", meaning the mobs of towns people whom the Swedes ended up owing huge sums, were fed up and attacked the Swedes.  It was mainly a local police matter in a way.  Crowds did not surround Topkapi as the article claims, which was nowhere near Bender.  Ottoman troops intervened, and Karl was then taken to Istanbul.  Why this is sometimes presented as a military skirmish between Ottomans and the Swedes is a mystery.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.153.82 (talk) 15:40, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bender skirmish confusions 

message: How do they pronounce Charles in Swedish? Do they pronounce the first syllable as /ʃ/ (like shoe) or /tʃ/ (like chair) or even /k/? and do they pronounce the last /s/?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.177.58.250 (talk) 11:02, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's Carl (or Karl) in Swedish, never Charles. English and French kings et al who are Charles's are pronounced approximately shawlss in Swedish. SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:25, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronounciation 

message: The shot that killed Charles XII entered the left temple, not the right. (This is a fact, after careful examinations of the king's skull.) SuecicaRex (talk) 13:07, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Then add a source to it? Imonoz (talk) 10:06, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, i forgott... The Swedish source has bin added.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuecicaRex (talk • contribs) 14:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The shot entered the left temple 

message: There are no real dates after a mention of just 'late 1707' in the first paragraph of the 'Russian resurgence' section, making the rest of that section, the next section, and the first half of the 'Pomerania and Norway' section difficult to grasp a decent timeline of.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by LafinJack (talk • contribs) 05:07, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 

message: "Sultan Ahmet III, as gesture to the King, had bought some of the Swedish women and children put up for sale by the Russians and turned them over to the Swedes, thus further strengthening the growing community of Caroleans."
Is there any source for this?  I've never heard of or read anything which indicated that Russia was into the slave trade, much less with the Turks, whom they were at war with.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.102.64.146 (talk) 19:38, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Wasn't in the reference, case of WP:SYNTH. Removed eight years later but better late than never I suppose. TylerBurden (talk) 08:56, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russian selling slaves to the Turks? 

message: Atleast three entire sections lackes all forms of inline refs to sources, infact there are no support at all for sections 2.1, 2.3 and 2.4. A good lead can lack sources, but must then be an overview of sourcered material further down. Is that the case here ? If not, also the lead must be sourcered. Also, the number of different sources whitin each major event (like a war) ought to use atleast two authors when possible. And Swedish historical litterature has indeed much to offer about this King. Here is a better (but not optimal example) Louis XIV of France, who lived around the same time as Charles XII. Boeing720 (talk) 02:11, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inline citations 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Charles XII of Sweden. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131005011236/http://www.peterenglund.com/textarkiv/mordslumpskott.htm to http://www.peterenglund.com/textarkiv/mordslumpskott.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.karlxii.se/default.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070209085239/http://www.islandnet.com:80/~kpolsson/swedhis/swed1700.htm to http://www.islandnet.com/~kpolsson/swedhis/swed1700.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:54, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Charles XII of Sweden. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120421235622/http://www.peterenglund.com/textarkiv/karlXII.htm to http://www.peterenglund.com/textarkiv/karlXII.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.karlxii.se/Default.asp
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.islandnet.com/~kpolsson/swedhis/swed1700.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:29, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I see repeated reversals being done on this without discussion. 
My edit here was for language, not for content. Though the murder-by-Frederick scenario has been discussed respectably for almost 300 years now, it's right to delete the new input about it due to insufficient sourcing. We'll see if Ms. Nordenkull's work gets reliable commentary in the media around the actual 300th death anniversary Nov. 30th. So far, not much mention. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:27, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Alleged murder

message: Hello, in this page, there are multiple uses of the word "her" in reference to countries, such as in the sentence "His brilliant campaigning and startling victories brought his country to the pinnacle of her prestige and power, ... " I do not believe that this usage is correct, especially in an encyclopedic context. To my knowlege countries should be referred to by "it" in general. --Thespündragon 23:29, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like the whole sentence should be re-written. --Equivamp - talk 23:40, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of "her" to refer to countries 

message: The source cited for the royal titles states the following:
King of Sweden, the Goths, the Wends;
Grand Prince of Finland;
Duke of Skåne, Estonia, Livonia, Karelia, Bremen, Verden, Stettin, Pomerania, the Kashubes, the Wends;
Prince of Rugen;
Lord of Ingria, Wismar;
Count-Palatine of the Rhine;
Duke in Bavaria, of Jülich, Kleve, Berg;
The titles "count of Zweibrücken-Kleeburg", "count of Veldenz", "count of Spanheim", "count of Ravensberg" and "lord of Ravenstein" are not mentioned in this source.
Also note that while duke of Pomerania is implied by "king of the Wends", it is not one of his official titles.
Bapo224 (talk) 12:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insufficient citation 

message: It would seem to be notable in itself if true, and that's the claim made by a recent infographic I saw on another website, and I can't see a more recent contender. Any ideas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.78.6.120 (talk) 22:17, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Any source stating this? --TylerBurden (talk) 23:20, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The prevailing academic view today is that he was assassinated from within. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:09, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last European Monarch to be Killed in Battle? 

message: as son of karl xi of sweeden,in 1697 charles xi died,so charles became king. 180.194.13.157 (talk) 07:39, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Charles in English, Karl in Swedish. TylerBurden (talk) 12:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  charles xii or karl? 

message: Is there a reason his latinized name (Carolus) is included in the first line of the article? This really isn't common practice for any other monarchs. I'm aware of the metal album by Sabaton (which I'm sure has many people directed to this article), however for consistency's sake I'm not sure this article should get special treatment? Skerbs (talk) 16:21, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Should probably be removed, other than the Sabaton reference I don't see anything else referring to him as such. --TylerBurden (talk) 17:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: sv:Marcia Carolus Rex is one example of the frequency where this king often has been called that, way before the band. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:47, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carolus Rex 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Eric XIV of Sweden which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 01:47, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Charles XI of Sweden which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 08:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: The article states that charles was exiled in the ottoman empire, but ive alwaysed learned that he sought refuge. Should the text be changed? Dencoolast33 (talk) 06:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No need. It does not say that he was 'exiled', but that he was 'in exile', in his case mostly a voluntary exile. Lots of sources use the term, thus can Wikipedia. --T*U (talk) 07:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exile