Talk:List of margraves and electors of Brandenburg

Making up ordinals
We should not make up our own ordinals. Is there any evidence that the kings of Prussia after 1713 continued numbering from their elector of Brandenburg predecessors for use in Brandenburg? Is there any document or work, for example, in which Friedrich Wilhelm II is called Friedrich Wilhelm III? If not, we shouldn't make up our own numbers. john k (talk) 03:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Dashes in groups of three numbers
This article includes en dashes (–) in groups of three numbers. Usually, the en dash is used to indicate a range, so I don't know what to think when I see something like
 * Albert I the Bear c. 1100 – 1157–1170

(I just edited the article, changing many hyphens to en dashes. The spacing in this Albert example is my doing.) If there is a meaning to this sort of thing, it should be explained in the text. If these are errors, they should be fixed. —Anomalocaris (talk) 01:35, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

I didn't explain, because as far as I can tell, it's standard practice to use the three-dates format on noble family trees. I don't know about en-dashes, but I consider it unlikely to be necessary - I can't really tell the difference between them. Zenzic-Eváristos (talk) 11:58, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Also, to add - feel free to add them yourself wheresoever you wish - I can't stop you, but I don't agree with you. Alsoç see the family trees of Scandinavian monarchs, or the Ottomans, or Roman and/or Byzantine emperors. Zenzic-Eváristos (talk) 10:15, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Table
In my opinion, the tables you created is unreadable and unusable. The article prior to your edits is better and more useful. I am tempted to rever to that, but I can see that you have included information absent from that version. Srnec (talk) 22:50, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi! How are you? Firstly, sorry for my late response. Secondly, thank you for your consideration for my hard work in putting all this together. Thirdly, can you explain, more specifically (and without indulging in non-constructive criticism, please!) why do you think my tables are "unreadable and unusable"? I can read them just fine. The table offers a lot of info, but if you want to follow the sequence of rulers you must look into the "Reign" and "Ruling part" columns. However this problem you pointed concerns me because I'm applying this style of info table in other families as well and I'm worried readers would not be able to read them. Maybe if I understand your point of view I can somewhat remove your doubts, or change something for it to become more usable/readable (and without taking off information)? Thank you in advance! Greetings, Mhmrodrigues (talk) 20:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Well, for example, Conrad II succeeds John II, yet there are seven intervening names. The reason behind the order of names eludes me. Srnec (talk) 01:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi ! That's because the rulers are ordered chronologically according to date of accession. Those seven rulers ascended to rulership in other parts of Brandenburg first (1267) than Conrad II did (1281). Also consider that:


 * As many houses order their rulers by generation and not specific lands, I tried to think of a way to get that around (this kind of table).
 * In this case, Otto III, Otto IV and Otto V didn't rule in the same feud: this table presents them in order. That's why the chronological order was chosen: because the numbering follows the accession of rulers and do not depend on the land they were ascending on: it only had to be part of the family's whole property.
 * Besides this, you have a glimpse of when and who succeeded whom in the chronological order in the various feuds of the family. The only exception in when a son didn't survive his father: in that case he is presented immediately after, as if ruling within his father's rule.
 * In my typical chronological succession table, if brothers divide the land, they will follow next to each other, showing right away the divisions made in that generation. Then the table will show you each of their successors, showing them sooner or later depending exclusively on the length of each brother's reign.
 * In this specific case, I found very odd to that a lot of brothers succeeded at the same time in the same margraviate, and that's why I went searching if there weren't divisions between them, and I found some truth in my thoughts, as you may see in the table.
 * Also, as I said, bear in mind to look at "Ruling part" column, for an easier following of the rulers. If you want to search for a specific feud (for example, Stargard) you can look exclusively in "Ruling part" column for the rulers of that specific land.
 * Hope I could be of help. Any more doubts please tell me!
 * (for trivia: my longest table? Easily the one in House of Ascania, where I present not not only the Brandenburg branch, but all of the Ascanian branches in this style of organisation. My best table? For me, the one I made in County of Nassau.

Greetings, Mhmrodrigues (talk) 21:13, 5 December 2023 (UTC)