Talk:Prince Gustaf Adolf, Duke of Västerbotten

Styles
Styles in Sweden are somewhat difficult, because they are seldom used and not regulated in law. I seem to recall that Birgitta is a Royal Highness, but her sisters are not. Please correct me if I'm wrong. --Jao 18:21, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Birgitta is still HRH because she only one of Gustav Adolf's daughters to marry equally, thus she retains the style of Royal Highness. Morhange 19:01, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Killed by bomb?
I can nowhere find on the internet that Gustaf Adolf was killed by a bomb in an airplane (except for wikipedia derivatives). I reverted it to a airplane accident. Thorin 00:03, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Number of people on plane
How many were on board the plane: All 22 people aboard the plane (18 passengers and six crew members) were killed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.192.181.151 (talk • contribs)
 * Whoops, my subtraction error. 16 passengers and 6 crew make 22. Fixed. Thank you for the correction, but please end your comments on a Talk page using ~ &mdash; this puts your signature for all to see. &mdash; JonRoma 23:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Regarding alleged support of the Nazis: (Some rumors claim that Danish Leftists had sabotaged the aircraft to take revenge on Gustaf Adolf for having supported the Nazis during the German occupation of Denmark.) --According to Aftonbladet, the Swedish Royal Court denies that Prince Gustaf Adolf supported the Nazis, and that he was simply fulfilling ceremonial requirements when he met with Nazi leaders. Because this is alleged support is disputed and because a legitimate source denies this claim, it should be either worded more carefully on this page or not at all. 67.176.182.31 08:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC)Alex, 02.29, 9 March 2006


 * Also according to Aftonbladet,it's true


 * Not really, Aftonbladet is quoting Tobias Hübinette who is notorious for making accusations of this nature with little or no foundation in fact.

Article move
What's the reason for moving this article from Gustaf to Gustav without prior discussion? He certainly wrote Gustaf himself, and the common practice is, as far as I know, to only normalize names of former kings. If it can be shown that he is indeed more often called Gustav Adolf in English, then what's the source? -- Jao 12:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * We use English. And consistency has its advantages. Your perception is slightly incorrect: Anglicization is not limited to monarchs, it goes to all if there are no overwhelming reasons to treat the person purely as a local. If anything international is present in appellations a person was/is used of, the result will lean towards anglicization. Usually, dukes and counts (even very recent ones), even medieval commoners (if they were somehow international) and so forth get an anglicization - for example, Charles, Duke of Södermanland, not Carl/Karl. Bishop Henry, not Henrik. Columbus, not Colón. Whereas from a totally other argument, one you did not present, this guy could be "Gustaf": he is so recent. Persons whose names usually would get anglicized on basis of position or internationality, such as Juan Carlos of Spain, Prince Carl Philip, and so forth, could be under national spellings simply because they live, or because English/American newspapers often use the national spelling. This exception has however not been extended beyond people who lived in, say, 1900 or later. And there should be some evidence that the national spelling is often used in English-speaking world, such as printed in newspapers... At least, you should understand that how a person her/himself wrote her/his name, is not important - the important thing is how English-speaking world refers to her/him. It seems to me that you make too much here of how a person is called in Swedish texts. Also, you should not bring Swedish usages here: if you have a custom to write your deceased kings as Gustav and living kings as Gustaf, that has no place in deciding english Wikipedia's namings - it may be important in deciding such issue in Swedish Wikipedia. As far as I know, English-speaking world has no convention to treat living and dead kings Gustavs differently by such a rule. Henq 11:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * In American English, Gustaf and his like-named ancestors and descendents are customarily known as "Gustaf", not "Gustav". The practice of Anglicizing names seems to be more popular among speakers of British English, and was more globally common in bygone days than it is today. I personally find it objectionable to contort people's names (or other proper nouns) into what we think they ought to be in our language, particularly when this contortion does not conform to common usage. Still, there is no clearcut WP policy on this, and, alas, not much consensus on what makes the most sense on Wikipedia. &mdash; JonRoma 23:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've moved this page -back- to 'Gustaf'. Why? Because this page had been moved to 'Gustav' without any discussion or consensus. Furthermore, this subjects relatives also have their articles as 'Gustaf'. GoodDay 21:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Moved this page to 'Gustav' again, as I've moved pages to 'Gustav V of Sweden' & 'Gustav VI Adolf of Sweden'. GoodDay 23:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Famous photo of the 4 Bernadotte
This photo shows Carl XVI Gustaf (the baby), Prince Carl Gustav Adolf, Gustav VI Adolf and Gustav V. Four generations in one photo. If someone could find out what the current copyright status is it might be a good pic to include here. Fred26 (talk) 21:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Speculative Nazi photo
I removed the photo but was quickly reverted. Since the article text clearly states that allagations of this man's Nazi sympathies are speculaive and clearly dubious, I believe the photo is misleading. Whether or not it's famous doesn't change the fact that it's inclusion in the article gives undue weight to a speculative angle, as if it were not speculative and dubious, and therefore is inapprpriate as given. It's like putting a famous photo of Princess Diana and the boyfriend who has been rumored to be the father of Prince Harry in Prince Harry's article. I'll be removing it again, unless someone can show us that it is appropriate. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 06:30, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The photo illustrates the part of the section that says "As an official representative of Sweden, Gustaf Adolf met with many Nazi leaders, including [...] Hermann Göring". The prince's attitude towards the Nazis has been debated in modern times, as well as during his lifetime, and this photo is one of debating points of that discussion, hence it illustrates the topic well. Also, the photo has been part of the article for a long time. --Marbe166 (talk) 07:46, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Removing the photograph strikes me as censorship. The photograph exists, it is genuine, it is found in literature (example) and it illustrates the topic discussed in the article. Gustaf Adolf met Göring and was photographed with him; that is a matter of historical record, not speculation. The reader is free to make of it whatever he or she wants. Winston Churchill's photograph with Joseph Stalin is not there to imply they were cordial. It is there because it is well-known, genuine, illustrative of the section, and common in literature. Surtsicna (talk) 10:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Mother's death
Wouldn't it be normal to mention in this article that his mother died when he was a small boy, and possibly also that she soon was replaced by a step-mother? At least the mother's early death seems to belong in anybody's biography. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)