Talk:Danish Realm

"Home rule and self rule"

I feel like wording, here, reads like a non sequitur:

  "In general, there are two conflicting views: (a) the laws delegate power from the Folketing and can be revoked unilaterally by it, and (b) the laws have special status so changes require the consent of the Faeroese Løgting or the Greenlandic Inatsisartut, respectively.

  Proponents of the first interpretation include Alf Ross, Poul Meyer, and Jens Peter Christensen. Ross, the chief architect of the Faeroese home rule, compared it to an extended version of the autonomy of municipalities. Meyer wrote in 1947, prior to the Faeroese home rule, that if power was delegated as extensive in other parts of the country, it would probably breach section 2 of the 1915 constitution, suggesting it did not do that here due to the Faroe Islands' separate history. Similarly, Christensen, a Supreme Court judge, said that due to the special circumstances, the scope of delegation need not be strictly defined."

Ostensibly, the second paragraph is supposed to the explain/address the reasoning of point (a) in the first paragraph - that the Folketing can unilaterally revoke home rule/self rule - but it doesn't feel like it's even related. In fact, if there is any relation at all, it almost implies the reasoning of point (b) given that the paragraph appears to remark more than once about how special/disintinct the relationship between these places and Denmark Proper is .

Does someone fluent in Danish want to rewrite this part to make it flow better? Criticalthinker (talk) 09:47, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

HI @Criticalthinker, I wrote this paragraph some years ago after much research. Thank you for your comment. I think the issues is that some pre-knowledge is required to understand it the way I understand it. That needs fixing, of course.

In Denmark, municipalities have some autonomy (delegated by the Folketing, thus revocable by the Folketing), and in this way, giving autonomy to Greenland and the Faroe Islands is really the same, albeit the scope is a bit extended. That is their argument, in essence, but that municipalities have autonomy is implicit, I see now.

§ 2 of the 1915 constitution ([1]) - almost the same as §3 in the current constitution ([2]) - is the separation of powers clause, saying that the Folketing have the legislative power. You cannot delegate too much of that power away without breaching § 2, but the opinions of Meyer and Christensen is that because the special history, you can give quite a lot away without running into issues with § 2. All of this is really a counter-argument to an argument that was never included in the text.

I will think about how it can be reworded to alleviate your points, while not stating more than the sources say. ― Hebsen (talk) 20:13, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

I have now rewritten the section. Feedback is appreciated. ― Hebsen (talk) 21:39, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Ross, the chief architect of the Faeroese home rule, argued that it was "a municipal self-government of extraordinary extensive scope".

Again, this would be a stronger argument for b) than a). "Extraordinary" in English would imply he thought of the self-government as special, and thus not capable of being unilaterally revoked. Criticalthinker (talk) 05:44, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

COMMON

Any reason the name of the article isn't 'The unity of the Realm'? On Google, this gives 1.8M results while "Danish realm" only gives 122K results. Semsûrî (talk) 22:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Apologies that someone took this long to reply, but as decided here, the consensus at the time (following extensive discussion and a previous failed vote) was that Danish Realm was a clearer and more understandable term, as opposed to the Kingdom of Denmark (this would conflict with the article for Denmark proper) or The Unity Of The Realm (a direct translation of rigsenheden, an old term that's now been supplanted by rigsfællesskabet, lit. Realm Fellowship). It is confusing when doing research, yes, but I believe it's less confusing than the unwieldy unity of the Realm.

As laid out in the article's intro, unity of the Realm refers to the relationship between the three parts of the kingdom, whereas this article talks about the area of which the Monarch of Denmark is head of state, and the legal/political structure thereof. R3troguy420 (talk) 13:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Greenland fake history

Greenland, already populated by the Indigenous Greenlandic Inuit, was settled by Norwegians in the 10th century, among those Erik the Red

This is factually wrong! The Norse arrived to Southern Greenland around 900 and there were no Inuit or other peoples around.

The Inuit Thule culture migrated from present day Canada to Northern Greenland around 1300 only reacing Southern Greenland around 1500.

The arctic Dorset culture was present in Northern Greenland around 900, but it was outcompeted and anihilated by the Inuit Thule Culture.

It is a totally false statement to claim that there was an Inuit population in Greenland when the Norse arrived.

The Norse in Greenland were in this respect, just as indigenous to Southern Greenland.

History of Greenland

Quintus Turbo (talk) 09:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect area for Denmark

In the section of the table that gives the area of each constituent component of the Danish Realm, the figure provided for "Denmark" (as in "Denmark proper" is actually the figure for the entirety of the Dabish Realm; metropolitan Denmark does not have a larger area than Greenland!

However, I'm on my mobile so I can't easily correct it. Ionophore (talk) 20:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Corrected the claimed area of Denmark. Today I changed the infobox to match the area of Denmark as cited in the table elsewhere on this page. Feel free to close this discussion topic if you agree with the change. Crookedsquare (talk) 16:26, 20 August 2024 (UTC)