![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is the proper plural form of Governorate General? Is it Governorates General? Governorate Generals? Governorates Generals?-- Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 17:32, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
"Governorates General". It is French-style naming, "general" being an adjective. BTW it needs to be clarified how the notions "gubernator" and "general-gubernator" (and "guberniya" and "general-gubernatorstvo") were related." Mikkalai 19:07, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. As for the difference between "gubernator" and "general-gubernator", maybe I'll add it later, unless you already have something to add.-- Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 19:15, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
The usual English term is in fact "Governor-Generalship", and in the Russian Empire at least it is not the same thing as a Губерния. A Guberniya is a province (normally known as an Oblast in the outlying regions of the Empire), and a Governor-General had authority over several provinces. In Turkestan, for instance, The Governor General had authority over the Syr-Darya, Ferghana, Samarkand and Transcaspian provinces. Sikandarji 14:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Has anywone got any info on the governor generals of russian estonia? -- Dahlis 23:00, 2005 September 2 (UTC)
Why are we translating this as "Governorate?" The 1911 Britannica uses "Government" as its term for divisions of Russia, or alternately "Province." This would point to what the usage was at the time these things actually existed. Can we point to usage of "Governorate"? john k 17:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with John that "government" (guberniya) would be a better term to use than governorate, as my searches through Google Books have brought up significantly fewer instances of the latter. Using some Baltic provinces as examples, guberniya is used occasionally, while usage of governorate is practically non-existent (Courland: government vs. governorate vs. guberniya; Livonia: government vs. governorate vs. guberniya). Unfortunately, the number of articles that would be changed does present a quandary. Olessi ( talk) 02:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Lest you still have doubts, a google books search shows that the terms "governorate" and "governorate general" are valid. "Governorship" is also used, although a good portion of the hits refers to the post of the Governor, not the administrative unit.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 21:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Judging from the above discussion and looking into the page " Governorate", I would propose to move this page to Governorates of Russia. `' Míkka >t 04:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Still not moved? It sits in the way to document usage outside the Russian Empire: http://www.nsi.bg/nrnm/index.php?i=1&ezik=en . The most consistent name would be Governorates of the Russian Empire. Guberniya would then only talk about the term. Androoox ( talk) 08:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
For those interested, this rather large (over 9 MB) map nicely depicts the Russian Empire's subdivisions in European Russia. [3] Olessi ( talk) 03:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Only two of the articles in Category:Governorates of the Russian Empire that use "governorate" do not use the form "X Governorate":
I moved them, but one non-Russian speaking user, which seems to be from Finland moved them back, called my moves "bad moves" , please raise your voice. Schwyz ( talk) 11:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I just read in Sergei Yesenin that he was born "in the Ryazan Province (Губерния, Gubernia)". Naively, I would have replaced that with " Ryazan Oblast". But from this article here it appears the oblasti were then only at the periphery. Is that just a naming convention, or was the Ryazan Gubernia a different entity from the Ryazan Oblast? The Russian Wikipedia has a section called ru:Список областей Российской империи § Области в составе наместничеств и губерний, but it doesn't actually seem to address this question. — Sebastian 07:18, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
As Ëzhiki suggests above, "creating other "XXX Province" disambiguations, where XXX is the name of a governorate and a modern oblast is always helpful, as is creating redirects from alternative names/terms/spellings/etc.". I just checked Kazan for that purpose, and found that Kazan Province is actually a redirect. Also, I realize that the wording of my question was ambiguous, I had meant to ask whether redirects XXX Gubernia → XXX Governorate are needed. — Sebastian 16:19, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
drive-by editing" - [[Penza Oblast|Penza Guberniia]], [[Yaroslavl Oblast|Yaroslavl guberniia]] is a really bad idea. I dont want to repeat here numerous issuess with non-transparent wikipipes, but such things must be killed on the spot. Lembit Staan ( talk) 02:31, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Most of the individual pages of each governorate are very terrible as the are basically tiny, unsourced stubs (e.g: Astrakhan Governorate ). If someone could please improve them or at least have suggestions for improvement?. Gott Erhalte Kaiser Franz ( talk) 01:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Sorry I am going to revert colleaague Franz in Astrakhan Governorate. You seem to be a very new editor and dont know the ruless of english wikipedia. He the article text must be based on reference to reliable sources, please read carefully out rules: WP:CITE and WP:RS. Because our main policy is WP:Verifiability. And in most cases the only way to verify wikipedia text is to check the references provided. You translated a huge text from russian wiki, which, as I keep noticing, has a huge number of articles with little references. We cannot accept unreferenced texts, sorry. Please translate only pieces which are supplied with footnotex and verify whether the footnoted text is covered in the sources cited. Unfortunately often the footnotes "migrate" due to careless addition of more text in front of the footnote.16:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
P.S. @ Gott Erhalte Kaiser Franz: FYI: this is our guideline : Help:Translation. It states what I was saying above: the translated piece of our article mush adhere to our (i.e., English Wikipedia) rules. Lembit Staan ( talk) 19:17, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
@ LouisAragon:@ Grandmaster:@ ZaniGiovanni: Re our discussion on the Elisabethpol Governorate talk page I thought it best to continue it here to have a more centralised discussion on the issue which affects numerous articles. The prevailing trend on these articles I identified was using the official Russian language name, followed by the translation of the state which owns most of the modern-day territory, followed by an optional translation of whichever ethnic group is the majority of the population, if they are not the same as the state which owns it. For example, the Shusha Uyezd should by default receive its official Russian name, accompanied by the translation of the state which owns most of its modern day territory, Azerbaijani for the Republic of Azerbaijan, followed by an Armenian translation given the Shusha Uyezd was majority ethnic-Armenian. In the case of the Elisabethpol Governorate, since the area mostly corresponds to modern-day Azerbaijan, and Armenians were not a majority in the province, I think it would be appropriate to only leave the Russian and Azerbaijani translations in the lede, that is my rationale on the issue and my understanding of the trend on these articles.
Another issue which should be discusssed is if an endonymic translation is included, should it use the anachronistic modern script, or the standard used at the time, for example, Azerbaijan Arabo-Persian in place of modern Azerbaijani Latin (which began use in 1992). If the aim is to establish a standard or default for translations in the lede, I believe it should be done here with a proper discussion on the pros and cons of doing so as to make the article as understandable as possible for the reader. - 𝑵𝒖𝒏𝒖𝒙𝒙𝒙 ✪ 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑘 02:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I already said in the
Elisabethpol Governorate talk, I support only official Russian spelling, as it was the Russian Empire. Also, we have issues of anachronism, which aren't being addressed. We can't add Az spelling for example with modern Latin alphabet, that's not how it works. You can't say I support multiple spellings, then say stuff like that. And for these reasons, leaving only the official Russian version is better and creates less confusion. We don't need to create a rule like this translation of the state which owns most of the modern-day territory, followed by an optional translation of whichever ethnic group is the majority of the population
we can just leave out all the other spellings and keep the only official Russian one.
ZaniGiovanni (
talk)
13:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Nunuxxx Do we have WP:RS stating those other spellings were officially recognized or used in documents? Or are we just going to play the WP:OR games, without even figuring out which alphabet was used? I'm still of the belief that only official Russian spelling of Russian Empire's Governorates should remain in the lead. If we can find at least one reliable source backing those other lang spellings, showing at the very least which alphabetic version was used, we should create a small subsection Name like LouisAragon suggested in Talk:Elisabethpol Governorate. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 21:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I haven't ignored your comments, I'm trying to answer each one of your points to help us reach a consensus, in lieu, you seem determined not to explain your rationale/logic that Ottoman district articles are deserving of native endonyms, but Russian Imperial and Azerbaijan Democratic Republic district articles aren't.- Where did I say this? My argument is that with Vilayets, if a name (as is the case with Diyarbakır and Erzrum villayets you brought up) is based on Armenian cities that have been Armenian for centuries and most importantly, comes from Armenian language, it does actually have a better justification for the lead inclusion, than saying "population=inclusion". If something is based on a specific language, by definition, said language spelling is a due inclusion. But even in those cases, I'm open to discussing the same treatment as Name section proposed here, but I'm not going to entertain it here on this talk page as I already said. Keep it to the respective article pages.
you seem determined not to explain your rationale/logic that Ottoman district articles are deserving of native endonyms, but Russian Imperial and Azerbaijan Democratic Republic district articles aren't.- What? Firstly, stop misrepresenting me about Villayets, I explained my position pretty clearly at this point. And secondly, I'm fine with removing / creating a section of other lang spellings for ALL governorates, not just Azeri spellings. Thought this was the whole point of the discussion, was it not, LouisAragon? To determine a standard for ALL governorates, yet Nunuxxx, you keep saying I have something specifically against Az spelling governorates. I actually removed all other lang spellings from Elisabethpol Governorate, Armenian included. The entire discussion was transferred to this talk page to define a standard for ALL governorates. FYI, baseless accusations qualify as personal attacks - consider this as a last warning from me. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 01:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
I think the best solution to this would be an RFC, with the questions:
Option 1: The lead of articles about governorates of the Russian empire should include official Russian language name (pre-reform script), followed by the translation of the state which owns most of the modern-day territory.
Option 2: The lead of articles about governorates of the Russian empire should include official Russian language name (pre-reform script), followed by the translation of the state which owns most of the modern-day territory, followed by an optional translation of whichever ethnic group is the majority of the population, if they are not the same as that of the state which owns it.
Option 3: The lead of articles about governorates of the Russian empire should include official Russian language name (pre-reform script).
Is everybody is ok with it, I will go ahead and start the RFC. Grand master 22:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
We have a template-generated red link for Autonomous governorate. Cleary identifiable concept? Worth of standalone article? Estopedist1 ( talk) 08:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is the proper plural form of Governorate General? Is it Governorates General? Governorate Generals? Governorates Generals?-- Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 17:32, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
"Governorates General". It is French-style naming, "general" being an adjective. BTW it needs to be clarified how the notions "gubernator" and "general-gubernator" (and "guberniya" and "general-gubernatorstvo") were related." Mikkalai 19:07, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. As for the difference between "gubernator" and "general-gubernator", maybe I'll add it later, unless you already have something to add.-- Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 19:15, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
The usual English term is in fact "Governor-Generalship", and in the Russian Empire at least it is not the same thing as a Губерния. A Guberniya is a province (normally known as an Oblast in the outlying regions of the Empire), and a Governor-General had authority over several provinces. In Turkestan, for instance, The Governor General had authority over the Syr-Darya, Ferghana, Samarkand and Transcaspian provinces. Sikandarji 14:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Has anywone got any info on the governor generals of russian estonia? -- Dahlis 23:00, 2005 September 2 (UTC)
Why are we translating this as "Governorate?" The 1911 Britannica uses "Government" as its term for divisions of Russia, or alternately "Province." This would point to what the usage was at the time these things actually existed. Can we point to usage of "Governorate"? john k 17:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with John that "government" (guberniya) would be a better term to use than governorate, as my searches through Google Books have brought up significantly fewer instances of the latter. Using some Baltic provinces as examples, guberniya is used occasionally, while usage of governorate is practically non-existent (Courland: government vs. governorate vs. guberniya; Livonia: government vs. governorate vs. guberniya). Unfortunately, the number of articles that would be changed does present a quandary. Olessi ( talk) 02:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Lest you still have doubts, a google books search shows that the terms "governorate" and "governorate general" are valid. "Governorship" is also used, although a good portion of the hits refers to the post of the Governor, not the administrative unit.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 21:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Judging from the above discussion and looking into the page " Governorate", I would propose to move this page to Governorates of Russia. `' Míkka >t 04:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Still not moved? It sits in the way to document usage outside the Russian Empire: http://www.nsi.bg/nrnm/index.php?i=1&ezik=en . The most consistent name would be Governorates of the Russian Empire. Guberniya would then only talk about the term. Androoox ( talk) 08:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
For those interested, this rather large (over 9 MB) map nicely depicts the Russian Empire's subdivisions in European Russia. [3] Olessi ( talk) 03:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Only two of the articles in Category:Governorates of the Russian Empire that use "governorate" do not use the form "X Governorate":
I moved them, but one non-Russian speaking user, which seems to be from Finland moved them back, called my moves "bad moves" , please raise your voice. Schwyz ( talk) 11:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I just read in Sergei Yesenin that he was born "in the Ryazan Province (Губерния, Gubernia)". Naively, I would have replaced that with " Ryazan Oblast". But from this article here it appears the oblasti were then only at the periphery. Is that just a naming convention, or was the Ryazan Gubernia a different entity from the Ryazan Oblast? The Russian Wikipedia has a section called ru:Список областей Российской империи § Области в составе наместничеств и губерний, but it doesn't actually seem to address this question. — Sebastian 07:18, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
As Ëzhiki suggests above, "creating other "XXX Province" disambiguations, where XXX is the name of a governorate and a modern oblast is always helpful, as is creating redirects from alternative names/terms/spellings/etc.". I just checked Kazan for that purpose, and found that Kazan Province is actually a redirect. Also, I realize that the wording of my question was ambiguous, I had meant to ask whether redirects XXX Gubernia → XXX Governorate are needed. — Sebastian 16:19, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
drive-by editing" - [[Penza Oblast|Penza Guberniia]], [[Yaroslavl Oblast|Yaroslavl guberniia]] is a really bad idea. I dont want to repeat here numerous issuess with non-transparent wikipipes, but such things must be killed on the spot. Lembit Staan ( talk) 02:31, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Most of the individual pages of each governorate are very terrible as the are basically tiny, unsourced stubs (e.g: Astrakhan Governorate ). If someone could please improve them or at least have suggestions for improvement?. Gott Erhalte Kaiser Franz ( talk) 01:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Sorry I am going to revert colleaague Franz in Astrakhan Governorate. You seem to be a very new editor and dont know the ruless of english wikipedia. He the article text must be based on reference to reliable sources, please read carefully out rules: WP:CITE and WP:RS. Because our main policy is WP:Verifiability. And in most cases the only way to verify wikipedia text is to check the references provided. You translated a huge text from russian wiki, which, as I keep noticing, has a huge number of articles with little references. We cannot accept unreferenced texts, sorry. Please translate only pieces which are supplied with footnotex and verify whether the footnoted text is covered in the sources cited. Unfortunately often the footnotes "migrate" due to careless addition of more text in front of the footnote.16:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
P.S. @ Gott Erhalte Kaiser Franz: FYI: this is our guideline : Help:Translation. It states what I was saying above: the translated piece of our article mush adhere to our (i.e., English Wikipedia) rules. Lembit Staan ( talk) 19:17, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
@ LouisAragon:@ Grandmaster:@ ZaniGiovanni: Re our discussion on the Elisabethpol Governorate talk page I thought it best to continue it here to have a more centralised discussion on the issue which affects numerous articles. The prevailing trend on these articles I identified was using the official Russian language name, followed by the translation of the state which owns most of the modern-day territory, followed by an optional translation of whichever ethnic group is the majority of the population, if they are not the same as the state which owns it. For example, the Shusha Uyezd should by default receive its official Russian name, accompanied by the translation of the state which owns most of its modern day territory, Azerbaijani for the Republic of Azerbaijan, followed by an Armenian translation given the Shusha Uyezd was majority ethnic-Armenian. In the case of the Elisabethpol Governorate, since the area mostly corresponds to modern-day Azerbaijan, and Armenians were not a majority in the province, I think it would be appropriate to only leave the Russian and Azerbaijani translations in the lede, that is my rationale on the issue and my understanding of the trend on these articles.
Another issue which should be discusssed is if an endonymic translation is included, should it use the anachronistic modern script, or the standard used at the time, for example, Azerbaijan Arabo-Persian in place of modern Azerbaijani Latin (which began use in 1992). If the aim is to establish a standard or default for translations in the lede, I believe it should be done here with a proper discussion on the pros and cons of doing so as to make the article as understandable as possible for the reader. - 𝑵𝒖𝒏𝒖𝒙𝒙𝒙 ✪ 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑘 02:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I already said in the
Elisabethpol Governorate talk, I support only official Russian spelling, as it was the Russian Empire. Also, we have issues of anachronism, which aren't being addressed. We can't add Az spelling for example with modern Latin alphabet, that's not how it works. You can't say I support multiple spellings, then say stuff like that. And for these reasons, leaving only the official Russian version is better and creates less confusion. We don't need to create a rule like this translation of the state which owns most of the modern-day territory, followed by an optional translation of whichever ethnic group is the majority of the population
we can just leave out all the other spellings and keep the only official Russian one.
ZaniGiovanni (
talk)
13:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Nunuxxx Do we have WP:RS stating those other spellings were officially recognized or used in documents? Or are we just going to play the WP:OR games, without even figuring out which alphabet was used? I'm still of the belief that only official Russian spelling of Russian Empire's Governorates should remain in the lead. If we can find at least one reliable source backing those other lang spellings, showing at the very least which alphabetic version was used, we should create a small subsection Name like LouisAragon suggested in Talk:Elisabethpol Governorate. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 21:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I haven't ignored your comments, I'm trying to answer each one of your points to help us reach a consensus, in lieu, you seem determined not to explain your rationale/logic that Ottoman district articles are deserving of native endonyms, but Russian Imperial and Azerbaijan Democratic Republic district articles aren't.- Where did I say this? My argument is that with Vilayets, if a name (as is the case with Diyarbakır and Erzrum villayets you brought up) is based on Armenian cities that have been Armenian for centuries and most importantly, comes from Armenian language, it does actually have a better justification for the lead inclusion, than saying "population=inclusion". If something is based on a specific language, by definition, said language spelling is a due inclusion. But even in those cases, I'm open to discussing the same treatment as Name section proposed here, but I'm not going to entertain it here on this talk page as I already said. Keep it to the respective article pages.
you seem determined not to explain your rationale/logic that Ottoman district articles are deserving of native endonyms, but Russian Imperial and Azerbaijan Democratic Republic district articles aren't.- What? Firstly, stop misrepresenting me about Villayets, I explained my position pretty clearly at this point. And secondly, I'm fine with removing / creating a section of other lang spellings for ALL governorates, not just Azeri spellings. Thought this was the whole point of the discussion, was it not, LouisAragon? To determine a standard for ALL governorates, yet Nunuxxx, you keep saying I have something specifically against Az spelling governorates. I actually removed all other lang spellings from Elisabethpol Governorate, Armenian included. The entire discussion was transferred to this talk page to define a standard for ALL governorates. FYI, baseless accusations qualify as personal attacks - consider this as a last warning from me. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 01:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
I think the best solution to this would be an RFC, with the questions:
Option 1: The lead of articles about governorates of the Russian empire should include official Russian language name (pre-reform script), followed by the translation of the state which owns most of the modern-day territory.
Option 2: The lead of articles about governorates of the Russian empire should include official Russian language name (pre-reform script), followed by the translation of the state which owns most of the modern-day territory, followed by an optional translation of whichever ethnic group is the majority of the population, if they are not the same as that of the state which owns it.
Option 3: The lead of articles about governorates of the Russian empire should include official Russian language name (pre-reform script).
Is everybody is ok with it, I will go ahead and start the RFC. Grand master 22:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
We have a template-generated red link for Autonomous governorate. Cleary identifiable concept? Worth of standalone article? Estopedist1 ( talk) 08:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)