This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Battle of Horodok (1655) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why again? -- Irpen 19:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Nahid, I agree. Let's settle this calmly. I am as calm as possible and very calmly I request my opponent to show this name;s being popular in English language sources on the subject. TIA, -- Irpen 18:54, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Are you saying that there is no English name you found? I need to know background from your end in order to make the best proposal. -- Irpen 19:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Of course it existed. The city was a part of Halych-Volhynia in medieval times, long before 1655. Leningrad analogy is inapplicable. The city was actually renamed. Leningrad and SPB are two different names of the same city and both names and their equivalents in any language reflect that. Grodek and Horodok are not different names. This is the same name rendered into different languages, more like Krakow and Krakau. How the town was "known back then" is irrelevant for our purpose. Sometimes we don't even know. What matters is how the town is referred to in modern scholarship in the particular context. This is more like Chernihiv/Chernigov issue, if you like. When questioned about my usage of Chernigov in the medieval context that was different from Chernihiv in the current one, it was my job to demonstrate that a non-modern name prevails in English scholarship in medieval context. This has not been demonstrated for Horodok. That it is called Grodek in Polish is not an issue here. That Polish Wikipedia calls its article pl:Gdańsk-Prusy Zachodnie does not affect how the relevant article is called in enwiki. -- Irpen 05:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Interesting, there are no English sources which confirm usage of this Polish name, so Gródek Jagielloński is absolutely not a widely accepted historical English, per NC then such situation occurs the modern official name should be used and Gródek Jagielloński is not official name. I suggest to eliminate current unfounded polonization of city name ASAP. M.K. ( talk) 10:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Please check how many of those claimed 70 hits apply to the century in question. -- Irpen 20:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Saying that the use of Grodek in the 20th century warrants the use of Grodek in the 17th is like saying the use of Danzig for the interbellum warrants the usage of Danzig for after the WW2. If the town was prevailingly called Grodek in the context of the time, the name can be used in the article. If no prevailing English usage of Polonism in the 17th century context can be established in English sources, then we should not use the polonism. -- Irpen 21:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Search among English books published since 1970s (ensuring modern sources) gives one book with Grodek in relation to this battle:
Two books use Gorodok:
Two books with Horodok:
As wee see the coverage in English is small, if any, with non-Polish names having a slight advantage. It could possibly be tweaked in either direction by expanding the sources' date range but it is clear that it would not change an overall picture. Either way, there is no evidence to establish the prevailing usage of the Polish name and no justification to alter the name of the town. -- Irpen 21:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
That it was PLC does not by itself make the Polish name prevailing in the context in question. Kijow was also part of PLC. It is never called such in English in the context of any time frame. Lviv, Kharkiv and Ternopil were parts of Ukraine in times of WW2. First two are called by Russian-sounding Lvov and Kharkov in WW2 context in the bulk of modern English literature about the war and the latter is called a very non-Russian Tarnopol (familiar to you name?) in WW2 context. Please demonstrate the similar usage of Grodek in proper context in the modern English literature about this time. This is a different issue from who it belonged to. Varshava also belonged to Russia. -- Irpen 04:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Battle of Horodok (1655) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why again? -- Irpen 19:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Nahid, I agree. Let's settle this calmly. I am as calm as possible and very calmly I request my opponent to show this name;s being popular in English language sources on the subject. TIA, -- Irpen 18:54, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Are you saying that there is no English name you found? I need to know background from your end in order to make the best proposal. -- Irpen 19:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Of course it existed. The city was a part of Halych-Volhynia in medieval times, long before 1655. Leningrad analogy is inapplicable. The city was actually renamed. Leningrad and SPB are two different names of the same city and both names and their equivalents in any language reflect that. Grodek and Horodok are not different names. This is the same name rendered into different languages, more like Krakow and Krakau. How the town was "known back then" is irrelevant for our purpose. Sometimes we don't even know. What matters is how the town is referred to in modern scholarship in the particular context. This is more like Chernihiv/Chernigov issue, if you like. When questioned about my usage of Chernigov in the medieval context that was different from Chernihiv in the current one, it was my job to demonstrate that a non-modern name prevails in English scholarship in medieval context. This has not been demonstrated for Horodok. That it is called Grodek in Polish is not an issue here. That Polish Wikipedia calls its article pl:Gdańsk-Prusy Zachodnie does not affect how the relevant article is called in enwiki. -- Irpen 05:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Interesting, there are no English sources which confirm usage of this Polish name, so Gródek Jagielloński is absolutely not a widely accepted historical English, per NC then such situation occurs the modern official name should be used and Gródek Jagielloński is not official name. I suggest to eliminate current unfounded polonization of city name ASAP. M.K. ( talk) 10:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Please check how many of those claimed 70 hits apply to the century in question. -- Irpen 20:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Saying that the use of Grodek in the 20th century warrants the use of Grodek in the 17th is like saying the use of Danzig for the interbellum warrants the usage of Danzig for after the WW2. If the town was prevailingly called Grodek in the context of the time, the name can be used in the article. If no prevailing English usage of Polonism in the 17th century context can be established in English sources, then we should not use the polonism. -- Irpen 21:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Search among English books published since 1970s (ensuring modern sources) gives one book with Grodek in relation to this battle:
Two books use Gorodok:
Two books with Horodok:
As wee see the coverage in English is small, if any, with non-Polish names having a slight advantage. It could possibly be tweaked in either direction by expanding the sources' date range but it is clear that it would not change an overall picture. Either way, there is no evidence to establish the prevailing usage of the Polish name and no justification to alter the name of the town. -- Irpen 21:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
That it was PLC does not by itself make the Polish name prevailing in the context in question. Kijow was also part of PLC. It is never called such in English in the context of any time frame. Lviv, Kharkiv and Ternopil were parts of Ukraine in times of WW2. First two are called by Russian-sounding Lvov and Kharkov in WW2 context in the bulk of modern English literature about the war and the latter is called a very non-Russian Tarnopol (familiar to you name?) in WW2 context. Please demonstrate the similar usage of Grodek in proper context in the modern English literature about this time. This is a different issue from who it belonged to. Varshava also belonged to Russia. -- Irpen 04:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)