Talk:Thurn und Taxis

(untitled)
Is it really "Turn"? Google (at least) thinks that "Thurn" with an H is far more common (to such a degree that "Turn" looks like a mistake). --Camembert

Etymology
Should this entry mention the trivia fact that the english word "tax" (and analogous words in other languages) come from the name of this family? --Anonymous
 * No, because it doesn't. --Angr/undefined 07:15, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Branding
I was in Amsterdam not that long ago, and saw what I think was a post office with the logo 'Thurn Und Taxis'. Does anyone know whether the postal service brand name of T&T has survived? -- Maru Dubshinki 12:27 PM Friday, 01 April 2005


 * I doubt that you saw a post office with that name. There is a dealer in stamps with the name Thurn & Taxis, but that is for collectors; it is not a post office, and there is probably no connection to the old T&T. Or perhaps you are confused with TNT, a modern postal service? --Eugene van der Pijll 09:09, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * That certainly is possible- I don't speak Dutch, and so was just guessing at it. It was a bit of a shock tho' as the only place I'd heard of T&T was in The Crying of lot 49, and I had thought it quite fictional. -- Maru Dubshinki 08:24 AM Saturday, 02 April 2005

Postal service
I don't understand this business with the King of Spain's heir buying out the company in the 18th century. From what I've read, the company still had its postal monopoly for as long as the Holy Roman Empire existed, and were trying to get it back during the Congress of Vienna. And which Spanish heir in the 18th century, precisely, is meant to have bought out the Thurn und Taxis company? john k 5 July 2005 17:47 (UTC)


 * The Thurn und Taxis postal service certainly existed in some form well into the 19th century, because they issued postage stamps. The World Stamp Almanac says they were taken over by Prussia in 1867.  That suggests that the area they were servicing was in the north and different from that bought by Spain in previous century.  Was it simply not part of the original deal, or was it started after the southern concession was sold?Proptology 02:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

und to and
Since in English they are properly called the princes and princess of Thurn and Taxis, the title should be completely anglicized to utilize 'and', rather than 'und'. It's equivalent to calling someone the Duke zu Sachsen when he would be the Duke in Saxony in English. User:24.137.116.163 2005-10-14T19:22:57
 * Please don't make such an important change without discussion. On Factiva there are 107 English-language entries for "Thurn and Taxis" and 774 English-language entries for "Thurn und Taxis". That is pretty overwhelming for UND. Noel S McFerran 13:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps in your more limited application site that may be true for the businesses it researches. But in the numbers game Google gives 65,000 English language sites for "und" and 3.8 million for "and".  A 58:1 ratio seems more overwhelming than a 7:1 ratio.  The "and" has consistently been used in philately for more than a century, and is still being used.  Eclecticology 18:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * PS. I've noted that the discussion about making the change was started over a year ago, and no-one objected in all that time. Eclecticology 18:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Factiva is not just for businesses; it is the largest NEWSPAPER database in the world (so it gives a pretty good idea of what things are called generally). Your Google numbers are a total misrepresentation since they include pages for the GAME.  A Google search of English-language pages for "Thurn und Taxis" finds 67,000; a similar search for "Thurn and Taxis" minus the word "game" finds 19,100.  But the Factiva numbers are really what counts. Noel S McFerran 19:13, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Noel, do a Factiva search on "Princess Diana" and tell me what you get. Charles 17:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think a better metric would be in-Wikipedia hits. The overwhelming majority of links are pointing to "Thurn and Taxis" - and they aren't talking about the game. --Gwern (contribs) 20:06, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That's because (to give credit where credit is due) Eclecticology changed the link on dozens of other pages. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Eclecticology Noel S McFerran 20:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh. Hmm. Never mind? --Gwern (contribs) 20:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * This is why we shouldn't base common name principles on wikipedia links. (among other reasons).  I agree with Noel - "Thurn und Taxis" seems to be primary English usage, and we shouldn't anglicize for the sake of anglicization. john k 21:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The google results, on further looking into it, don't really seem all that conclusive when one additionally excludes "wikipedia", and excludes mentions of "game" in references to "Thurn und Taxis" as well. 42,000 to 25,000, I got, and the first result for "Thurn und Taxis" is, despite it being an English language search, clearly in Germany.  I think the real issue here is that both "Thurn und Taxis" and "Thurn and Taxis" are used in English, and we have no particular guidelines about which to prefer.  In such cases, it would seem best to have a naming convention, rather than to work on the basis of dubious google tests. john k 22:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Google books favours Thurn und Taxis 4:1 over Thurn and Taxis, albeit around 20-25% of the "und" hits are for works in German; around 3:1 in English. That's pretty overwhelming. How's it spelled in The Crying of Lot 49 ? "And" there would bugger up webwide ghits. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I have nothing to do with either the game or the Pynchon book. I don't know how you arrived at your Google Book Search figures but when I searched the exact phrase I received only 9 hits for "and" and 4 hits for "und".  It's contrary to what you said, but not much of a sample anyway.  Being used in English is not the same as being English, and the usual way of doing things here is to the most common established English term.  Both the Scott (American) and the Gibbons (British) Stamp Catalogues have used "Thurn and Taxis" consistently in their annual editions for well over a century.  These are the places where the names comes up most consistently.  I have also seen sites that use both forms in the same place with "von Thurn und Taxis" applied to particular individuals, but "Thurn and Taxis" (without "von") when talking about the family in general.  In any event, how many other names do we have that use "und" in this way as if it were English?  With many older names we use "name of place", not "name von place".  Why should it be any different for "and"? Eclecticology 10:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, he'd be the duke of Saxony. It may have been common to translate the conjunction before but now it's just treated as a unit. — Llywelyn II   05:08, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

The origins of the family
I beg your pardon, but I had to correct some historical errors concerning the descent and origin of the family. You can find more informations in German Wikipedia. Please excuse my bad English. Best wishes from --Gudrun Meyer 09:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ein Schwachsinn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.142.180.39 (talk) 09:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree there is something off. Other articles, Jindřich Matyáš Thurn and Lamoral II Claudius Franz, Count of Thurn and Taxis, state that the House of Thurn and Taxis is a cadet branch of the House of Della Torre. Does anyone know which is correct? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:21, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Current business interests
The family continues to have great wealth. What business are they in today? Phytism (talk) 11:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

blazon

 * The badger (German: Dachs) became Taxis in the family coat of arms.

Huh? The shield shows a picture of a badger, not the word Taxis or Dachs or Tasso. Was this sentence mangled by a sloppy edit? —Tamfang (talk) 05:38, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * A part of the sentence was missing. I hope that I found a good explanation for "Taxis", according to de:Thurn und Taxis. Best wishes from --Gudrun Meyer (talk) 16:44, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Well done. —Tamfang (talk) 23:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Sources for article expansion
Anyone here able to read Italian in small print? — Llywelyn II   05:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Also.


 * In addition, of course, to the Italian and German articles for this page and some of the (currently redlinked) guys here. — Llywelyn II   05:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Baron von Thurn und Taxis - invented the "taximeter"
The often suggested ethymology should be mentioned in the article. It really doesn't matter that it's nonsense: by not mentioning it, it won't go away and actually gives this page the image of being incomplete and thus probably wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.106.6.242 (talk) 16:14, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Quote A taximeter is by definition what makes a ‘cab’ a ‘taxicab’. Fitting of a taximeter was made compulsory in London from July 1907. The modern taximeter was a German invention and its name comes from its inventor, Baron von Thurn und Taxis. It was first used in Berlin but soon adopted worldwide. .. .. Early taximeters were totally mechanical in operation and the clock that recorded waiting time had to be wound by hand. UNQUOTE Source : http://www.lvta.co.uk/history.htm 49.195.158.107 (talk) 02:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Do not believe anything being written. Please read Taximeter, where you can find the name of the inventor Friedrich Wilhelm Gustav Bruhn. The "Baron von Thurn und Taxis" is a hoax. --Gudrun Meyer (talk) 14:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 25 January 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved  (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Thurn und Taxis → Thurn and Taxis – "Und" is German for "and" which appears dominant in other articles in Wikipedia: 8 of the 8 subcategories under Category:Thurn and Taxis use "and". Sometimes the category creators are less close to the subject than the article editors and, in the Category:Princes of Thurn and Taxis and Category:Princesses of Thurn and Taxis it looks like the articles prefer "and" by about 60 to 2 like with Albert, 12th Prince of Thurn and Taxis and Princess Maria Sophia of Thurn and Taxis.

If this was a strong German phrase I could see more argument for keeping it intact but, according to this article, it's originally based on a transliteration of French anyway. Given all that, a reader for this Wikipedia is more likely to recognize "Thurn and Taxis" per WP:ENGLISH. (Alternatively, if kept, I'll nominate the categories to match this title.) RevelationDirect (talk) 21:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. Jack Frost (talk) 07:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose. It isn't as if Thurn and Taxis are two things or places. They are two Germanicized names and I think connecting them by und helps keep this clear: it is a singular name and the parts are not separable. That said, I am mostly familiar with the Thurn-und-Taxis Post and usage may vary across specialties and eras. Google Ngrams support the status quo, but am genuinely surprised how many RS I see using "and". Srnec (talk) 01:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Usually seen in the German, even in English-language sources. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose it's Thurn und Taxis- the categories should be fixed for this, not the other way round. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:41, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose The title is a complete phrase Thurn und Taxis that should remain in it's original correct language and not be picked apart by just changing the language of the conjunction. Doing that would be just as valid as changing the conjunction title to "Thurn also Taxis" but how silly is that. However, this discussion throws up a larger issue about all the other articles that are using "and" which should be changed to, or revert to, "und" but that probably require a larger discussion than we can decide here. ww2censor (talk) 15:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)