Talk:Electorate of Saxony

message: I have done a quick copy-edit on this, but I don't think it was in bad shape to begin with. Unless anyone objects, I shall remove the copy-edit tag. Arthur Holland 20:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

message: ref: (Intro)
*The Electorate of Saxony () was an independent hereditary 
*electorate of the Holy Roman Empire from 1356–1806.  It was  the successor state
*of the Duchy of Saxe-Wittenberg and was itself replaced in Napoleonic times by the
Kingdom of Saxony (1806).
I've added clarify tagging in the above, which I was comparing to the contents in Saxe-Wittenberg, redirects to Wittenberg. Looking at both articles, some things are out of synch, and the political entity was almost certainly not refered to as the Electorate of Saxony... likely was another Duchy of Saxony.
*In my unclear tagging:
**Firstly: under the house of _____ and inherited by the Saxe-Wittenberg family I suspect, which greatly increased their holdings, I would infer. As a state title, it sucks, as you are confounding a state and a dignity (title) and so both with a geo-political region! 
**Second: Some timelines problems here with Saxe-Witternberg article. The state (diplomatic title) in the thirty years war era was what??? Wasn't that referred to as yet another Duchy of Saxony? Or just as Saxony?
* Dukes of, Duchy of Saxe-Wittenberg articles also needed. If the fate of the electorate was shared by the dukes, fine, but the duchy needs some separate treatment too. 
* One consequence is Saxony (disambiguation) needs clarified (and patched) as well.
* Looking over Saxony, looks like this electorate should be named Upper Saxony.
Cheers! // FrankB 19:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gots some titles and links problems 

message: The plagiarism tag that appears originally had this content, which is reproduced here so the details are not lost. Note, this is a textual negative of the original appearing tag (all bold was Roman text, and vice versa in the original tag content), by virtue of the tags default to make its text content bold. Note, in following, hard breaks were added to make manifest the markup breaks that appeared in the original tag. For discussion: 
Again, content of this, placed here for discussion. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 21:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I have heavily edited the frequent German sentence structure of the English text herein and I believe what we have now is not plagiarism having studied Sacher's original, with the references now added. --Po Mieczu (talk) 01:14, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Original tag content

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither the electorate nor the elector ever used this coat of arms, never existed. Also the electoral hat is also inaccurate. — User:Dragovit (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Hi everyone! The coat of arms currently being used in this article cuts off part of the swords and is generally not ideal. 
The coat of arms used would be more accurate (not to mention aesthetically pleasing) if they included the entirety of the charges and were presented in a period appropriate escutcheon (see the references section for examples of the arms). 
The arms in Sir Ian's flag accomplish all of this, but they don't seem to be isolated and/or usable. Could someone with editing capabilities isolate the shield so that it can be used for this article? 
Of course, I mean no disrespect to Jimmy44, but I do think this change would be for the better.
Theodore Christopher (talk) 18:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coat of Arms 

message: I would like to correct the CE issue by translating the 'Political History' section of the German-language article Kurfürstentum Sachsen. It will probably need some abridgment, and where it's appropriate I can include (CE-referenced) material from the English-language version that's not in the German. The German 'Political History' section has about 70 citations, so it's well-sourced and should make a good article. 
If anyone has any objections or suggestions, let me know. I'm ready to get at it.  GHStPaulMN (talk) 18:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic Encyclopedia issue 

message: This translation comes from the 'Political History' section of the very long German-language article. I did a considerable amount of abridgement of the 'Political History', leaving out lower levels of detail, redundancies, and most but not all of the passages that focused on economic or social history. I'm still confident, though, that the final translation is true to the German and reads as a coherent narrative. If anyone disagrees, please let me know.
As for the original English-language article, I kept almost none of it. Its sections on religious topics were overly long (because of their source), so I didn't see any reason to keep them. Virtually everything else is covered in the translation, but without the potential plagiarism issues. GHStPaulMN (talk) 13:19, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation from the German article