| Revision as of 16:31, 19 December 2006 editAppleseed (talk | contribs)13,167 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:35, 19 December 2006 edit undoGhirlandajo (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers89,661 edits →Treaty of Polyanov: case closedNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| :::Why "Treaty of Polanów" and not "Treaty of Polanowo", which had the most hits? ] (]) 15:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC) | :::Why "Treaty of Polanów" and not "Treaty of Polanowo", which had the most hits? ] (]) 15:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::::Because the Polanów/Polanow/Polanov variants are more common than owo/ovo, when taken together. Not that I strongly prefer any of the variatns - just something to think about...--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 15:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC) | ::::Because the Polanów/Polanow/Polanov variants are more common than owo/ovo, when taken together. Not that I strongly prefer any of the variatns - just something to think about...--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 15:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :::::It's a pity to see you both back to polonization of the Russian place-names. Any attempt to stir up |
:::::It's a pity to see you both back to polonization of the Russian place-names. Any attempt to stir up shitfest on this harmless article will be promptly reported. --<font color="FC4339">]</font> <sup><font color="C98726">]</font></sup> 16:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::Ghirlandajo, instead of threatening other editors, would like to comment on the Google Books results or on Piotrus' suggestion? ] (]) 16:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC) | ::::::Ghirlandajo, instead of threatening other editors, would like to comment on the Google Books results or on Piotrus' suggestion? ] (]) 16:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::I view any attempt to spell the names of Russian locations in Polish as deliberate provocation. Only a child may not understand that a Latin-script search will yield more results for the Polish language (which employs Latin script) rather than Russian (which employs Cyrillic script). Case closed. --<font color="FC4339">]</font> <sup><font color="C98726">]</font></sup> 16:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:35, 19 December 2006
 | Russia Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Treaty of Polyanov
I would like to move this article to Treaty of Polyanov. It doesn't require a vote but if anyone has any objections, please raise them here. Please do not create a reverse redirect from this red link in bad faith which would just make things more cumbersone. We are all reasonable people and can discuss this if we have to. Thanks, --Irpen 18:59, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
- Is Polyanov the most common English spelling? I would like to apply rules from Misplaced Pages:Naming_conventions/Geographic_names to this, so maybe we should wait for them to be ready? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:06, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
The river of Polyanovka is obscure enough to not have "any modern most common English spelling". So, we should just check for the usage in the context of the treaty. For example, Britannica uses Polyanov spelling in two articles: "Wladyslaw IV Vasa" and "Thirty Years War" and doesn't use Polanów or Polanow in any. --Irpen 20:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
- I did a quick check on Google books, with the following results:
- "treaty of polyanov" 1
- "treaty of polyanovka" 1
- "treaty of polanow" 1
- "treaty of polanowo" 3
- "treaty of polanov" 1
- Thoughts? Appleseed (Talk) 00:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, it would appear the original name (Treaty of Polanów) may be the best. Also, articles should not be moved when the name is discussed on talk (like here). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Why "Treaty of Polanów" and not "Treaty of Polanowo", which had the most hits? Appleseed (Talk) 15:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Because the Polanów/Polanow/Polanov variants are more common than owo/ovo, when taken together. Not that I strongly prefer any of the variatns - just something to think about...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 15:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- It's a pity to see you both back to polonization of the Russian place-names. Any attempt to stir up shitfest on this harmless article will be promptly reported. --Ghirla 16:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ghirlandajo, instead of threatening other editors, would like to comment on the Google Books results or on Piotrus' suggestion? Appleseed (Talk) 16:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- I view any attempt to spell the names of Russian locations in Polish as deliberate provocation. Only a child may not understand that a Latin-script search will yield more results for the Polish language (which employs Latin script) rather than Russian (which employs Cyrillic script). Case closed. --Ghirla 16:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ghirlandajo, instead of threatening other editors, would like to comment on the Google Books results or on Piotrus' suggestion? Appleseed (Talk) 16:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- It's a pity to see you both back to polonization of the Russian place-names. Any attempt to stir up shitfest on this harmless article will be promptly reported. --Ghirla 16:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Because the Polanów/Polanow/Polanov variants are more common than owo/ovo, when taken together. Not that I strongly prefer any of the variatns - just something to think about...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 15:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Why "Treaty of Polanów" and not "Treaty of Polanowo", which had the most hits? Appleseed (Talk) 15:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, it would appear the original name (Treaty of Polanów) may be the best. Also, articles should not be moved when the name is discussed on talk (like here). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)