Talk:Dual monarchy

Disambig project?
What does it mean that this is part of the Disambig project? I think it needs to be added to the appropriate history projects. I wanted to suggest noting that a dual monarchy is a type of personal union (I think). So this would be good to mention in the intro so people can link back and forth and better understand the distinction.ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Information deleted from article
This was removed fromt he article, and I just wanted to make sure that it's not accurate information: "A dual monarchy is not necessarily a personal union.In a personal union two or more kingdoms are ruled by the same person but there are no other shared government structures. States in personal union with each other have separate militaries, separate foreign policies and separate customs duties. In this sense Austria-Hungary was not a personal union, as both states shared a cabinet that governed foreign policy, the Army and common finances. " If it were or just needed clarification it would be good to includeChildofMidnight (talk) 23:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The stuff about Austria-Hungary is correct. But to be honest, I'm not sure the definition of personal union is correct. I was assuming the definition I found was correct (though I mean to check it out) and pointing out that Austria-Hungary does not fit that definition. Therefore a dual monarchy is not necessarily a personal union. But we will have to explore the definition of personal union. I have a hunch a persdonal union is simply a union of states under a single person, irrespective of whether there are separate armies and foreign policies.--Gazzster (talk) 23:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * And note that the definition of personal union contradicts the opening definition of dual monarchy.--Gazzster (talk) 23:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Personal Union
I have rapidly discovered that attempts to research 'personal union' on the web are very difficult. There are no shortage of web pages but most are verbatim quotes from Wikipedia.And to make it even more frustrating, many of these are quotes from older edits of Personal Union. I don't know if anyone out there can help? Does anyone beside me find it scary that we band of amateur, untrained, often erroneous, hit or miss kind of editors have such influence?--Gazzster (talk) 00:29, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth (which isn't much, sorry) my Columbia encyclopedia has no entry for personal union and under dual monarchy says, "see Austro-Hungarian Monarchy". My Random House dictionary says Dual Monarchy: "the kingdom of Austria Hungary 1867-1918". Nothing for personal union. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:16, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree on the "scary" influence of WP, esp. the websites that copied and pasted from WP back when verifiabilty was less enforced. When doing a Google search I always include "-Wikipedia" as a search term. You'll still get a couple of WP pastes, where there was no attribution, but the number of hits goes dramatically down and the quality of the information - if it's out there at all - improves correspondingly. Scolaire (talk) 07:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Good advice. Ta!--Gazzster (talk) 13:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Dual monarchy. 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/20090202111034/http://bartleby.com:80/65/au/AustroHu.html to http://www.bartleby.com/65/au/AustroHu.html

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) 07:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

History
Dual kingship 41.223.118.69 (talk) 18:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)