This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hmm. Maybe I'll regret this later, or maybe no one will notice this at all, but should I start a debate on where this article should be? I would prefer Kharkiv, the Ukrainian name, although I've visited the city and fully realise that most inhabitants primarily speak Russian. I don't know if there is a consensus on Ukrainian place-names, but if there isn't, I would suggest using the Ukrainian names except for places in the Crimea. There is an article at Kharkiv region, so at present it's all a bit inconsistent. Maybe I'll come back later and decide to move this page, unless I find reasonable objections. -- Iceager 12:59, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Kharkov 233,000 Kharkiv 71,900
Kharkov 507,000 Kharkiv 170,000
Kharkov 353,000 Kharkiv 145,000
This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 12:41, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello! Как один из активных участников, наполняющих эту ветку директорий (живу в Харькове :) ), очень хочу, чтобы возник единый стандарт и не было бесконечных переименований.
Участник Ahonc привел следующие доводы в пользу Kharkiv:
Собственно из этих же соображений исходил и я, когда именовал свои файлы, используя название Kharkiv, предполагая, что так или иначе официальное название города будет иметь приоритет.
Кроме этого, я только что заглянул в имеющиеся дома словари и энциклопедии:
Я - за название "Kharkov", в противном случае будет слишком много противостояний. Канопус Киля 21:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
На мой взгляд, ничто не мешает использовать обе категории сразу и с русским транслейтом и с украинским. Русский язык на территории города Харькова является региональным, украинский государственным. Пусть будут и Kharkov и Kharviv. Сдобников А. 06:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
PS: Нехай буде і Khorkov, Khurkov, Kherkus, Churkus etc. Ні, повинна бути одна назва, і це Kharkiv -- 68.44.228.126 ( talk) 14:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
ИМХО, есть прямой смысл называть город так, как пишется домен. Домен у нас kharkov.ua, предлагаю оставить Kharkov. Кроме того, есть такое понятие, как самоназвание -- а большинство жителей нашего города таки называют свое место жительство именно "Харьковом". BratvaNavsegda 17:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
С уважением, EvgenyGenkin 20:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
| flaglink/core | variant = | size = | name = | altlink = national rugby union team | altvar = rugby union}} -- Leonid Dzhepko 08:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Меня попросили высказать своё мнение в этом обсуждении. Высказываю. Т.к. названия категорий приходится давать на английском языке, то я, когда создаю новые категории, называю их так же как называются статьи в английской Википедии. На мой вгляд, обсуждать вопрос наименования отдельно на Викискладе лишен смысла. Спорные моменты лучше обсудить в обсуждении статьи в Википедии. Я понимаю позицию, как одной, так и другой стороны, но в этом вопросе всё должны решать языковые нормы английского языка, а не русского или украинского -- Butko 07:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Мои 5 копеек (хотя эта страница не лучшее место для этой дискуссии). Как решение любого дифференциального уравнения зависит от начальных условий, так и ответ о единственно правильном названии не имеет единственно верного решения. Даже транслитерация на с единственно правильного языка (опять же у каждого он свой) на английский может быть разной.
Думаю, что идеальным решением была бы поддержка перенаправлений для категорий и переводы категорий на язык интерфейса конкретного пользователя с помощью interwikis/wiktionary/omegawiki/или ещё лучшего метода. Чтобы каждый мог видеть то что хочет — Харьков/Харків/Харкаў/Charków/т.д.
Если кто-то может помочь достичь идеального решения — пожалуйста, помогите.
EugeneZelenko 15:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Евгений, извините, что своим вопросом развел у вас на страничке такую дискуссию, я надеялся, что существуют некие нормы для подобных случаев. Редиректы в категориях сейчас не работают ни в одном из проектов, наколько мне известно, и они противоречат самой логике категорий... Вы не могли бы, тем не менее, вынести некое временное решение, до тех пор, пока технически получится решить этот вопрос в предложенном вами русле? (Как я понял, это займет не мало времени :( .) Уместна ли увязка с названием статей в en-wiki? EvgenyGenkin 07:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
RUSSIANS STOP WRITING KHARKOV. KHARKIV IS UKRAINIAN CITY AND THE CORRECT SPELLING IS UKRAINIAN KHARKIV. NOT RUSSIAN KHARKOV.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.44.228.126 (
talk)
22:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
It has been emerged that in the city the local government just equivalated Russian as a status of refional [3], [4]. Googling the two results:
5,220,000 Kharkov 1,470,000 Kharkiv
With the ratio of 5:1. Which the same for Kiev-Kyiv. The city is exclusively Russophone (as is the Oblast, unlike in Kiev), and most of the billboards, unlike Kiev, exhibit an overwheliming Russian language. The Metro still has quite a lot of Russian writings everywhere and voice announcemets are bilingual. That is enough of a case for its move. I am putting up a request for it. -- Kuban Cossack 03:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Too late, I've posted a move request already. In any case I propose to revert the page move for a much more common name, which is now an officially bilingual city. Besides that is how Vitebsk and Mogilev got moved to the Russian spellings.--
Kuban Cossack
03:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I suggest you withdraw your proposals from WP:RM and portals. Such things should not be blasted without preliminary discussion and as of now, the move will not likely fly anyway. This will bring nothing but bad blood. Have some patience to discuss things. If I didn't convince you, let's continue here. No need to bring crowds of users from WP:RM with no clue on the issue unless we cannot agree here and one side chooses to force a vote. Trust me, I am talking reason here. -- Irpen 03:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
-- Kuban Cossack 03:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
These are all good points to be used in articles, inlcuding this one as well as UA L and others. But not for this article's title. For the latter, nothing matters more than prevailing English usage. For the very same reason, the WW2 articles use Battle of Kharkov, because of the usage in the English L WW2 books. This can peacefully coexist with the Kharkiv article similarly how to Chernihiv article coexists with the princes of Chernigov articles. Those princes frivolously moved, need to be moved back as per an ArbCom ruling.
But again, use the vote as the last resort. WP prevailing rule is to find the consensus. Vote is the necessary evil if we cannot cannot find it. You can even use Kharkov in the text of this very article when the context warrants (like for the times of the RU empire). But usage and titles are separate issues and should be treated separately. -- Irpen 03:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh just one last googling result:
Modern Kharkov 298,000 Modern Kharkiv 116,000
Hmm perhaps I can ivite some Kharkovites to express their view on the matter, (no vote rigging like you know who did) just some opinions. (Although I would expect the amount of blue-ribboned user pages to go up should they become permanent wikipedians.)-- Kuban Cossack 03:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Guys, please stop it. Кияни, Киевляне, Харкiв'яни and Харьковчане have much very little direct influence on the English usage. Better ask Londoner's and New Yorkers about Kharkiv or Kharkov and they won't know. At best, they will know Kiev and Odessa, and the latter only due to several U.S. Odessas. So, once they don't know, we go check major papers in Lexis Nexis and Britannica. The answer is Kharkiv and Kiev and that's how the articles are called. Let's concentrate on improving the articles now and shelve the issue. -- Irpen 08:39, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for Russian. Напишу чтобы больше не было каких-либо вопросов по части ссылок на Google и прочие "источники" информации. Не могут использоваться в качестве приводимых доказательств вывески, указатели и рекламные объявления на украинском языке (в т.ч. и на русском, т.к. по нескольким фото нельзя судить о картине в целом) увиденные на фотографиях или вживую. Причина проста до умопомрачения - проводимая правительством политика насильственной украинизации (да, для тех кто не знает - это правда). Если кто не в курсе, то в любом административном учреждении давно изданы указы, запрещающие размещение знаков, вывесок, официальных объявлений и пр. на русском языке. Или точнее разрешающие, но только на украинском. Справедливости ради нужно заметить, что это не 100% тотальный контроль, т.е. можно встретить в ВУЗе или НИИ доски объявлений на русском языке, никто их срывать не будет. Везде своя специфика: например, в метро 99% процентов рекламы идет на украинском языке, железная дорога - 100% украинский и так далее. СМИ в этом смысле и повезло и не повезло одновременно. И на телевидении и на радио русский язык де юре квотирован на данный момент в объеме 15% (нужно уточнение). Доходит до абсурда. Как это выглядит: к примеру, ведут одну передачу два ведущих, разговаривающих по-русски. Через неделю один переходит на украинский, извинившись в эфире перед зрителями и заявив, что это вынужденные меры и сделано не по их желанию. Еще через неделю оба переходят на украинский. Такие вот "порядки". И это в одном из самых русскоговорящих городов на Украине. + Есть такое понятие, как официально утвержденные на государственном уровне правила написания названий в английской транслитерации. Обычно этими правилами и пользуются составители различных энциклопедий, путеводителей и т.п. Ничего общего эти правила с международными традициями, многолетними договоренностями, или с привычками отдельных зарубежных граждан не имеют. И тут конечно никому не важно, что как минимум 90% населения города - говорит по-русски. -- Zeleniy 1:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The US Department of State widely uses "Kharkiv" (search: Kharkiv site:state.gov). Silimarly, the British Embassy in Kyiv uses "Kharkiv" (search: Kharkiv site:gov.uk), the majority of local (at the level of provinces) governments in Canada use "Kharkiv" (search: Kharkiv site:gov.ab.ca, Kharkiv site:gov.sk.ca, etc.). These contries represent the majority of English speaking countries and as such, "Kharkiv" should be used to avoid confusion. Here is the official reference. Search the "U.S. Board on Geographic Names" (aka US BGN) ( http://gnswww.nga.mil/geonames/GNS/index.jsp). It recommends Kharkiv. This is the last modification (made in 1997). The prior modification was in 1994 and recommended "Khar’kov". I want to emphasize that the U.S. Board on Geographic Names governs how geographic names must be spelled in official documents in the U.S. This discussion should be closed for good and never be raised again. Solarapex 00:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The Kharkiv execution is mentioned in the Katyn massacre. Local people maintain http://www.memo.kharkov.ua/ site. They quote http://www.memo.kharkov.ua/amer.htm and http://artofwar.ru/b/bobrow_g_l/text_0170.shtml there. Xx236 13:53, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I corrected what was said under the picture of Freedom Square: it is not the second largest square in the world, as it is also said here: Freedom Square, Kharkiv
Need help to add a link to Category:Kharkovities. I think it makes sense to add it to this article. See the first paragraph. Solarapex 07:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe that the average January temperature isn't 6.9°C but much lower. It seems that it is a typo, but I don't know where I can get the proven information about that matter. Can anyone help me? Thanks in advance -- Mormat 22:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Russians (anti-Ukrainians) should stop adding Khakriv in Russian (Kharkov). We should use only one name. And that name is Ukrainian Kharkiv, not Russian Kharkov. We should stop Russians. They have no right to add there language to Ukrainian cities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.228.126 ( talk) 14:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
That what I am talking about, why add Kharkov in Russian? Everyone agreed (besides Russians) on spelling Kharkiv. Lets keep it this way. -- 68.44.228.126 ( talk) 14:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Muller Dictionary doesn't say anything... Most of it was writen in USSR times. Of course in those times Soviets wouldn't allow to use word Kharkiv in English language. Now Ukraine is independent country with it's language Ukrainian (the only official in Ukraine) and it's history. So, lets keep only Ukrainian translated name - Kharkiv. Thanks. -- Oleg Kikta ( talk) 22:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Lets use only one spelling Kharkiv, not Russian Kharkov! -- 68.44.228.126 ( talk) 13:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Kharkiv – Kharkov → Kharkiv – to use only the current name in English language Kharkiv.
Kharkiv should be generally used in this article, but Kharkov should certainly appear at least once, for the benefit of readers who are familiar with that name. For example, anyone reading general English-language history of WWII will probably not have seen Kharkiv at all (and go try to change it in WWII articles if you want to know how it feels to bang your head against a wall). I think general consensus would agree with this so a vote shouldn't really be necessary (disregarding the disruptive anon). Editors should have the discretion to write what makes sense, although I suppose this may involve some negotiating about particular occurrences of the name. — Michael Z. 2008-05-09 22:34 z
I've protected this page for 4 hours to let you all work out how the city's name should be presented, here on the talk page. Let me know if this is not enough time, and I will gladly protect the article for a few more days or weeks.
Please hold discussions on the talk page, not in page edit summaries. — Michael Z. 2008-05-27 14:11 z
Dear Vizu local politicians can't change the constitution of Ukraine witch says Ukrainian is the only official language in Ukraine, your "proofs" are completely meaningless. Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 21:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Michael, what else have you expected to find? The Ukrainian language and ethnos was constantly discriminated especially in the Soviet Army. No wonder that its difficult to find a Ukrainian language on the streets of Kharkiv, today. The discrimination did not start with the Soviet Union, but rather was extended. Therefore, today there are alot of this crazy confusion amongst people. Aleksandr Grigoryev ( talk) 05:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Right, most modern atlases use Kharkiv including Britanica encyclopaedia [7] although Kuban kazak tried to make use believe otherwise did Russian nationalism got in the way of wanting to write facts for some editors? I know I should assume good faith but I get a bit sick of Russians trying to tell Ukraine what to do... Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 21:51, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I still wonder how legal this "regional staus of Russian" is since Ukraine didn't sign the wole treaty... see [8]. Ukraine undertakes obligations under Parts I, II, IV, V of the Charter except paragraph 5 of Article 7 of Part II. See treaty here > [9]. As far as I can see de facto Ukraine didn't sign the treaty at all since this article 7 seems to be the heart of the article.... Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 21:38, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
See all Kharkov city sites: citynet.kharkov.ua — Official website of Kharkov City Information Center city.kharkov.ua — Official website of Kharkov City Council Kharkov city portal Your beloved Kharkov — Kharkov city portal gortransport.kharkov.ua — Transport in Kharkov Old Kharkov Gallery — Photos and postcards Forum Kharkov City — Forum Kharkov City karta.kharkov.ua — Interactive Map http://region.library.kharkov.ua/lit_kharkov.php?year=2001&part=01 оф. сайт гос. б-ки Короленко; Литература о Харьковщине http://kharkov.nezabarom.com.ua Городской портал http://www.kharkovforum.com Харьковский форум http://www.kharkov.ua/culture/2.html Харьков. История и архитектура http://www.kharkov.com/news/?p=165 Памятники архитектуры Харькова http://www.shops.kharkov.ua/ktinfo.php?info=galkh Галерея «Старый Харьков». Фотографии, открытки, рисунки http://5nizza.kharkov.ua Харьковский общественный юмористический еженедельник http://tourist.kharkov.ua/map/ Карты и планы города, современные и старинные http://prokharkov.com/ Харьков http://gorod.kharkov.ua/ Город Харьков http://www.city.kharkov.ua/ Официальный сайт Харьковского городского совета http://www.pravoslavie.kharkov.ua/index.php Официальный сайт Харьковской и Богодуховской епархии Православной Церкви http://www.old.itl.net.ua/kharkov/history http://kharkov.vbelous.net/ Сайт Добро пожаловать в Харьков http://fotobank.vecherniy.kharkov.ua/ Фоторепортажи событий в Харькове http://fotobank.mediaport.info/ События Харькова в фотографиях http://gortransport.kharkov.ua/ Харьков Транспортный — про общественный транспорт города http://all.kharkov.ua/ Портал «Весь Харьков» http://www.toshka.ru/geo/ukrreg/kharkov/kharkov.html Харьковщина: краткая информация по региону и городу http://www.kharkovforum.com/ Неофициальный форум города Харькова http://mykharkov.org.ua/ информационно-справочный портал «Мой Харьков» http://tourist.kharkov.ua/ Харьковский Турист. Also Wikimapia - Kharkov: [10] -- Vizu ( talk) 22:28, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
"The question here is simply what is given as the official name, not what is used in the article."
Then why is the title of this section "Presentation of the city's name" and not "Official Name"? My understanding is the "official name" in the infobox refers to the official name in English, which may but does not necessarily correspond to the name in the official language of the country (which is the "native name"), as in my examples of Munich and Moscow. I don't disagree with using the Ukrainian-derived name as the official name, or one of them, what I disagree with is the desire by some to pretend that is the only name used when a large percentage (probably a majority) of English-language sources use Kharkov, though that may be changing. And ignoring the fact that a large percentage (if not a majority) of the people in the area use a name other than the Ukrainian name (though that too may be changing). The article needs to reflect reality, not a false reality based on how someone thinks things should be. And I still don't understand why the constitution or official language has any bearing on any of this. Gr8white ( talk) 23:20, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I think the current opening sentence is the best version it can be, maybe in they lead it can be added that most Kharkovians use Kharkov (a source would be nice but I belief it anyhow..). Sorry to all I lost my temper earlier. The trying to use Britannica to proof a point while Britannica redirects you from Kharkov to Kharkiv got on my last nerves. A Kharkiv/Kharkov solution in the infobox is fine with me, my problem was always the 9at first) strange opening line of the article. Shouldn't the fact that the city council proclaimed Russian a regional language be mentioned in the article, including if it is legal or not? Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 02:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Please go ahead (I have no idea how to do that)! I'm glad were all happy with the outcome! Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Check out:
Содержание ПЕРША ЧАСТИНА. До засновання київської держави.
Упадок козаччини і українського житя. 98. Обмеження гетьманської управи. 99. Перше скасованнє Гетьманства. Полуботок. 100. Відновленне гетьманства і гетьман Апостол. 101. Друге скасованне гетьманства. 102. Гетьманство Розумовського. 103. Устрій і суспільні відносини Гетьманщини. 104. Слобідщина. 105. Культурне жите Східньої України—письменство і школа.]
Bandurist ( talk) 14:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, if you studied your Ukrainian language you would know that Kharkiv is in Ukrainian and it is the official name in Ukrainian. Why don't you simple find the old Soviet Russian-Ukrainian dictionary and look it up. Nobody calls Krasnodar - Ekaterindar, right? Or Volgograd - Tsaritsyn or Stalingrad? Aleksandr Grigoryev ( talk) 05:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Folks, please don't write “formerly Kharkov” in the lead sentence. This is another English spelling, and it has yet to be repressed by the Supreme Commissariat for the People's English Language. — Michael Z. 2009-02-01 16:35 z
About last edits: what the inhabbitants call the city is no criteria, nobody in Vienna calls it Vienna, they call it Wien. Kharkiv's city residents are primarily Russophone is expalined in the article, I think readers can calculate 1+1=2. — Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 21:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
When was the city renamed, in 1991 or before? — Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 14:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
If someone knows more about the 150 metres tall wooden radio tower in Kharkiv, which stood there before World War II than please write something about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.202.170 ( talk) 20:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey everyone! Just wanna tell my opinion about Kharkov vs Kharkiv problem. I was born in Kharkov and I live in Kharkov now. You khow, people in Kharkov spoke Russian during Soviet times and still speak Russian in spite of all goverment attempts to change it. This is not going to change. Local language does not change because of any changes in the country. I'll tell nothing about any poll results, google search comparisons, because the main massage is clear: Kharkov and Kharkovites speak Russian. I don't think anyone will argue about this. Russian language has special status in Kharkov according to the city goverment. Kiev is Kiev, Odessa is Odessa, just let us call our city as we want. Guys, I want to conclude: You can call Kharkov in whatever way, but we, Kharkovians, will admit just Kharkov, whatever official position is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.120.128.196 ( talk) 16:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey everyone! I have a different point of view. I recently defended my doctorate dissertation in February at the Kharkiv State Academy of Culture on Bursatsky spusk. All education courses are in Ukrainian except for the chinese and arabic students studying there. All the advertising, the Metro, the cinema is in Ukrainian. Ukrainian is spoken in all the suburbs of Kharkiv and the environs which are totally Ukrainian speaking, as opposed to Kyiv, where the suburbs are more russified. Even in the centre one now hears more Ukrainian and what is interesting is that if people are addressed in Ukrainian they answer in that language. Are we talking about the same city? Bandurist ( talk) 17:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Google search, pages from the UK only:
Evidently both spellings are currently used in English.-- Toddy1 ( talk) 17:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
The interesting thing with these discussions is that the preference of local people is not wanted by the people who want to change the English language spelling to some foreign spelling. All this stuff about the primacy of the Ukrainian language over the English language in English language wikipedia come for the most part from foreigners who live in USA or Canada.-- Toddy1 ( talk) 19:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hmm. Maybe I'll regret this later, or maybe no one will notice this at all, but should I start a debate on where this article should be? I would prefer Kharkiv, the Ukrainian name, although I've visited the city and fully realise that most inhabitants primarily speak Russian. I don't know if there is a consensus on Ukrainian place-names, but if there isn't, I would suggest using the Ukrainian names except for places in the Crimea. There is an article at Kharkiv region, so at present it's all a bit inconsistent. Maybe I'll come back later and decide to move this page, unless I find reasonable objections. -- Iceager 12:59, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Kharkov 233,000 Kharkiv 71,900
Kharkov 507,000 Kharkiv 170,000
Kharkov 353,000 Kharkiv 145,000
This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 12:41, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello! Как один из активных участников, наполняющих эту ветку директорий (живу в Харькове :) ), очень хочу, чтобы возник единый стандарт и не было бесконечных переименований.
Участник Ahonc привел следующие доводы в пользу Kharkiv:
Собственно из этих же соображений исходил и я, когда именовал свои файлы, используя название Kharkiv, предполагая, что так или иначе официальное название города будет иметь приоритет.
Кроме этого, я только что заглянул в имеющиеся дома словари и энциклопедии:
Я - за название "Kharkov", в противном случае будет слишком много противостояний. Канопус Киля 21:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
На мой взгляд, ничто не мешает использовать обе категории сразу и с русским транслейтом и с украинским. Русский язык на территории города Харькова является региональным, украинский государственным. Пусть будут и Kharkov и Kharviv. Сдобников А. 06:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
PS: Нехай буде і Khorkov, Khurkov, Kherkus, Churkus etc. Ні, повинна бути одна назва, і це Kharkiv -- 68.44.228.126 ( talk) 14:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
ИМХО, есть прямой смысл называть город так, как пишется домен. Домен у нас kharkov.ua, предлагаю оставить Kharkov. Кроме того, есть такое понятие, как самоназвание -- а большинство жителей нашего города таки называют свое место жительство именно "Харьковом". BratvaNavsegda 17:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
С уважением, EvgenyGenkin 20:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
| flaglink/core | variant = | size = | name = | altlink = national rugby union team | altvar = rugby union}} -- Leonid Dzhepko 08:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Меня попросили высказать своё мнение в этом обсуждении. Высказываю. Т.к. названия категорий приходится давать на английском языке, то я, когда создаю новые категории, называю их так же как называются статьи в английской Википедии. На мой вгляд, обсуждать вопрос наименования отдельно на Викискладе лишен смысла. Спорные моменты лучше обсудить в обсуждении статьи в Википедии. Я понимаю позицию, как одной, так и другой стороны, но в этом вопросе всё должны решать языковые нормы английского языка, а не русского или украинского -- Butko 07:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Мои 5 копеек (хотя эта страница не лучшее место для этой дискуссии). Как решение любого дифференциального уравнения зависит от начальных условий, так и ответ о единственно правильном названии не имеет единственно верного решения. Даже транслитерация на с единственно правильного языка (опять же у каждого он свой) на английский может быть разной.
Думаю, что идеальным решением была бы поддержка перенаправлений для категорий и переводы категорий на язык интерфейса конкретного пользователя с помощью interwikis/wiktionary/omegawiki/или ещё лучшего метода. Чтобы каждый мог видеть то что хочет — Харьков/Харків/Харкаў/Charków/т.д.
Если кто-то может помочь достичь идеального решения — пожалуйста, помогите.
EugeneZelenko 15:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Евгений, извините, что своим вопросом развел у вас на страничке такую дискуссию, я надеялся, что существуют некие нормы для подобных случаев. Редиректы в категориях сейчас не работают ни в одном из проектов, наколько мне известно, и они противоречат самой логике категорий... Вы не могли бы, тем не менее, вынести некое временное решение, до тех пор, пока технически получится решить этот вопрос в предложенном вами русле? (Как я понял, это займет не мало времени :( .) Уместна ли увязка с названием статей в en-wiki? EvgenyGenkin 07:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
RUSSIANS STOP WRITING KHARKOV. KHARKIV IS UKRAINIAN CITY AND THE CORRECT SPELLING IS UKRAINIAN KHARKIV. NOT RUSSIAN KHARKOV.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.44.228.126 (
talk)
22:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
It has been emerged that in the city the local government just equivalated Russian as a status of refional [3], [4]. Googling the two results:
5,220,000 Kharkov 1,470,000 Kharkiv
With the ratio of 5:1. Which the same for Kiev-Kyiv. The city is exclusively Russophone (as is the Oblast, unlike in Kiev), and most of the billboards, unlike Kiev, exhibit an overwheliming Russian language. The Metro still has quite a lot of Russian writings everywhere and voice announcemets are bilingual. That is enough of a case for its move. I am putting up a request for it. -- Kuban Cossack 03:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Too late, I've posted a move request already. In any case I propose to revert the page move for a much more common name, which is now an officially bilingual city. Besides that is how Vitebsk and Mogilev got moved to the Russian spellings.--
Kuban Cossack
03:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I suggest you withdraw your proposals from WP:RM and portals. Such things should not be blasted without preliminary discussion and as of now, the move will not likely fly anyway. This will bring nothing but bad blood. Have some patience to discuss things. If I didn't convince you, let's continue here. No need to bring crowds of users from WP:RM with no clue on the issue unless we cannot agree here and one side chooses to force a vote. Trust me, I am talking reason here. -- Irpen 03:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
-- Kuban Cossack 03:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
These are all good points to be used in articles, inlcuding this one as well as UA L and others. But not for this article's title. For the latter, nothing matters more than prevailing English usage. For the very same reason, the WW2 articles use Battle of Kharkov, because of the usage in the English L WW2 books. This can peacefully coexist with the Kharkiv article similarly how to Chernihiv article coexists with the princes of Chernigov articles. Those princes frivolously moved, need to be moved back as per an ArbCom ruling.
But again, use the vote as the last resort. WP prevailing rule is to find the consensus. Vote is the necessary evil if we cannot cannot find it. You can even use Kharkov in the text of this very article when the context warrants (like for the times of the RU empire). But usage and titles are separate issues and should be treated separately. -- Irpen 03:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh just one last googling result:
Modern Kharkov 298,000 Modern Kharkiv 116,000
Hmm perhaps I can ivite some Kharkovites to express their view on the matter, (no vote rigging like you know who did) just some opinions. (Although I would expect the amount of blue-ribboned user pages to go up should they become permanent wikipedians.)-- Kuban Cossack 03:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Guys, please stop it. Кияни, Киевляне, Харкiв'яни and Харьковчане have much very little direct influence on the English usage. Better ask Londoner's and New Yorkers about Kharkiv or Kharkov and they won't know. At best, they will know Kiev and Odessa, and the latter only due to several U.S. Odessas. So, once they don't know, we go check major papers in Lexis Nexis and Britannica. The answer is Kharkiv and Kiev and that's how the articles are called. Let's concentrate on improving the articles now and shelve the issue. -- Irpen 08:39, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for Russian. Напишу чтобы больше не было каких-либо вопросов по части ссылок на Google и прочие "источники" информации. Не могут использоваться в качестве приводимых доказательств вывески, указатели и рекламные объявления на украинском языке (в т.ч. и на русском, т.к. по нескольким фото нельзя судить о картине в целом) увиденные на фотографиях или вживую. Причина проста до умопомрачения - проводимая правительством политика насильственной украинизации (да, для тех кто не знает - это правда). Если кто не в курсе, то в любом административном учреждении давно изданы указы, запрещающие размещение знаков, вывесок, официальных объявлений и пр. на русском языке. Или точнее разрешающие, но только на украинском. Справедливости ради нужно заметить, что это не 100% тотальный контроль, т.е. можно встретить в ВУЗе или НИИ доски объявлений на русском языке, никто их срывать не будет. Везде своя специфика: например, в метро 99% процентов рекламы идет на украинском языке, железная дорога - 100% украинский и так далее. СМИ в этом смысле и повезло и не повезло одновременно. И на телевидении и на радио русский язык де юре квотирован на данный момент в объеме 15% (нужно уточнение). Доходит до абсурда. Как это выглядит: к примеру, ведут одну передачу два ведущих, разговаривающих по-русски. Через неделю один переходит на украинский, извинившись в эфире перед зрителями и заявив, что это вынужденные меры и сделано не по их желанию. Еще через неделю оба переходят на украинский. Такие вот "порядки". И это в одном из самых русскоговорящих городов на Украине. + Есть такое понятие, как официально утвержденные на государственном уровне правила написания названий в английской транслитерации. Обычно этими правилами и пользуются составители различных энциклопедий, путеводителей и т.п. Ничего общего эти правила с международными традициями, многолетними договоренностями, или с привычками отдельных зарубежных граждан не имеют. И тут конечно никому не важно, что как минимум 90% населения города - говорит по-русски. -- Zeleniy 1:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The US Department of State widely uses "Kharkiv" (search: Kharkiv site:state.gov). Silimarly, the British Embassy in Kyiv uses "Kharkiv" (search: Kharkiv site:gov.uk), the majority of local (at the level of provinces) governments in Canada use "Kharkiv" (search: Kharkiv site:gov.ab.ca, Kharkiv site:gov.sk.ca, etc.). These contries represent the majority of English speaking countries and as such, "Kharkiv" should be used to avoid confusion. Here is the official reference. Search the "U.S. Board on Geographic Names" (aka US BGN) ( http://gnswww.nga.mil/geonames/GNS/index.jsp). It recommends Kharkiv. This is the last modification (made in 1997). The prior modification was in 1994 and recommended "Khar’kov". I want to emphasize that the U.S. Board on Geographic Names governs how geographic names must be spelled in official documents in the U.S. This discussion should be closed for good and never be raised again. Solarapex 00:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The Kharkiv execution is mentioned in the Katyn massacre. Local people maintain http://www.memo.kharkov.ua/ site. They quote http://www.memo.kharkov.ua/amer.htm and http://artofwar.ru/b/bobrow_g_l/text_0170.shtml there. Xx236 13:53, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I corrected what was said under the picture of Freedom Square: it is not the second largest square in the world, as it is also said here: Freedom Square, Kharkiv
Need help to add a link to Category:Kharkovities. I think it makes sense to add it to this article. See the first paragraph. Solarapex 07:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe that the average January temperature isn't 6.9°C but much lower. It seems that it is a typo, but I don't know where I can get the proven information about that matter. Can anyone help me? Thanks in advance -- Mormat 22:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Russians (anti-Ukrainians) should stop adding Khakriv in Russian (Kharkov). We should use only one name. And that name is Ukrainian Kharkiv, not Russian Kharkov. We should stop Russians. They have no right to add there language to Ukrainian cities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.228.126 ( talk) 14:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
That what I am talking about, why add Kharkov in Russian? Everyone agreed (besides Russians) on spelling Kharkiv. Lets keep it this way. -- 68.44.228.126 ( talk) 14:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Muller Dictionary doesn't say anything... Most of it was writen in USSR times. Of course in those times Soviets wouldn't allow to use word Kharkiv in English language. Now Ukraine is independent country with it's language Ukrainian (the only official in Ukraine) and it's history. So, lets keep only Ukrainian translated name - Kharkiv. Thanks. -- Oleg Kikta ( talk) 22:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Lets use only one spelling Kharkiv, not Russian Kharkov! -- 68.44.228.126 ( talk) 13:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Kharkiv – Kharkov → Kharkiv – to use only the current name in English language Kharkiv.
Kharkiv should be generally used in this article, but Kharkov should certainly appear at least once, for the benefit of readers who are familiar with that name. For example, anyone reading general English-language history of WWII will probably not have seen Kharkiv at all (and go try to change it in WWII articles if you want to know how it feels to bang your head against a wall). I think general consensus would agree with this so a vote shouldn't really be necessary (disregarding the disruptive anon). Editors should have the discretion to write what makes sense, although I suppose this may involve some negotiating about particular occurrences of the name. — Michael Z. 2008-05-09 22:34 z
I've protected this page for 4 hours to let you all work out how the city's name should be presented, here on the talk page. Let me know if this is not enough time, and I will gladly protect the article for a few more days or weeks.
Please hold discussions on the talk page, not in page edit summaries. — Michael Z. 2008-05-27 14:11 z
Dear Vizu local politicians can't change the constitution of Ukraine witch says Ukrainian is the only official language in Ukraine, your "proofs" are completely meaningless. Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 21:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Michael, what else have you expected to find? The Ukrainian language and ethnos was constantly discriminated especially in the Soviet Army. No wonder that its difficult to find a Ukrainian language on the streets of Kharkiv, today. The discrimination did not start with the Soviet Union, but rather was extended. Therefore, today there are alot of this crazy confusion amongst people. Aleksandr Grigoryev ( talk) 05:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Right, most modern atlases use Kharkiv including Britanica encyclopaedia [7] although Kuban kazak tried to make use believe otherwise did Russian nationalism got in the way of wanting to write facts for some editors? I know I should assume good faith but I get a bit sick of Russians trying to tell Ukraine what to do... Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 21:51, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I still wonder how legal this "regional staus of Russian" is since Ukraine didn't sign the wole treaty... see [8]. Ukraine undertakes obligations under Parts I, II, IV, V of the Charter except paragraph 5 of Article 7 of Part II. See treaty here > [9]. As far as I can see de facto Ukraine didn't sign the treaty at all since this article 7 seems to be the heart of the article.... Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 21:38, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
See all Kharkov city sites: citynet.kharkov.ua — Official website of Kharkov City Information Center city.kharkov.ua — Official website of Kharkov City Council Kharkov city portal Your beloved Kharkov — Kharkov city portal gortransport.kharkov.ua — Transport in Kharkov Old Kharkov Gallery — Photos and postcards Forum Kharkov City — Forum Kharkov City karta.kharkov.ua — Interactive Map http://region.library.kharkov.ua/lit_kharkov.php?year=2001&part=01 оф. сайт гос. б-ки Короленко; Литература о Харьковщине http://kharkov.nezabarom.com.ua Городской портал http://www.kharkovforum.com Харьковский форум http://www.kharkov.ua/culture/2.html Харьков. История и архитектура http://www.kharkov.com/news/?p=165 Памятники архитектуры Харькова http://www.shops.kharkov.ua/ktinfo.php?info=galkh Галерея «Старый Харьков». Фотографии, открытки, рисунки http://5nizza.kharkov.ua Харьковский общественный юмористический еженедельник http://tourist.kharkov.ua/map/ Карты и планы города, современные и старинные http://prokharkov.com/ Харьков http://gorod.kharkov.ua/ Город Харьков http://www.city.kharkov.ua/ Официальный сайт Харьковского городского совета http://www.pravoslavie.kharkov.ua/index.php Официальный сайт Харьковской и Богодуховской епархии Православной Церкви http://www.old.itl.net.ua/kharkov/history http://kharkov.vbelous.net/ Сайт Добро пожаловать в Харьков http://fotobank.vecherniy.kharkov.ua/ Фоторепортажи событий в Харькове http://fotobank.mediaport.info/ События Харькова в фотографиях http://gortransport.kharkov.ua/ Харьков Транспортный — про общественный транспорт города http://all.kharkov.ua/ Портал «Весь Харьков» http://www.toshka.ru/geo/ukrreg/kharkov/kharkov.html Харьковщина: краткая информация по региону и городу http://www.kharkovforum.com/ Неофициальный форум города Харькова http://mykharkov.org.ua/ информационно-справочный портал «Мой Харьков» http://tourist.kharkov.ua/ Харьковский Турист. Also Wikimapia - Kharkov: [10] -- Vizu ( talk) 22:28, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
"The question here is simply what is given as the official name, not what is used in the article."
Then why is the title of this section "Presentation of the city's name" and not "Official Name"? My understanding is the "official name" in the infobox refers to the official name in English, which may but does not necessarily correspond to the name in the official language of the country (which is the "native name"), as in my examples of Munich and Moscow. I don't disagree with using the Ukrainian-derived name as the official name, or one of them, what I disagree with is the desire by some to pretend that is the only name used when a large percentage (probably a majority) of English-language sources use Kharkov, though that may be changing. And ignoring the fact that a large percentage (if not a majority) of the people in the area use a name other than the Ukrainian name (though that too may be changing). The article needs to reflect reality, not a false reality based on how someone thinks things should be. And I still don't understand why the constitution or official language has any bearing on any of this. Gr8white ( talk) 23:20, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I think the current opening sentence is the best version it can be, maybe in they lead it can be added that most Kharkovians use Kharkov (a source would be nice but I belief it anyhow..). Sorry to all I lost my temper earlier. The trying to use Britannica to proof a point while Britannica redirects you from Kharkov to Kharkiv got on my last nerves. A Kharkiv/Kharkov solution in the infobox is fine with me, my problem was always the 9at first) strange opening line of the article. Shouldn't the fact that the city council proclaimed Russian a regional language be mentioned in the article, including if it is legal or not? Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 02:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Please go ahead (I have no idea how to do that)! I'm glad were all happy with the outcome! Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Check out:
Содержание ПЕРША ЧАСТИНА. До засновання київської держави.
Упадок козаччини і українського житя. 98. Обмеження гетьманської управи. 99. Перше скасованнє Гетьманства. Полуботок. 100. Відновленне гетьманства і гетьман Апостол. 101. Друге скасованне гетьманства. 102. Гетьманство Розумовського. 103. Устрій і суспільні відносини Гетьманщини. 104. Слобідщина. 105. Культурне жите Східньої України—письменство і школа.]
Bandurist ( talk) 14:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, if you studied your Ukrainian language you would know that Kharkiv is in Ukrainian and it is the official name in Ukrainian. Why don't you simple find the old Soviet Russian-Ukrainian dictionary and look it up. Nobody calls Krasnodar - Ekaterindar, right? Or Volgograd - Tsaritsyn or Stalingrad? Aleksandr Grigoryev ( talk) 05:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Folks, please don't write “formerly Kharkov” in the lead sentence. This is another English spelling, and it has yet to be repressed by the Supreme Commissariat for the People's English Language. — Michael Z. 2009-02-01 16:35 z
About last edits: what the inhabbitants call the city is no criteria, nobody in Vienna calls it Vienna, they call it Wien. Kharkiv's city residents are primarily Russophone is expalined in the article, I think readers can calculate 1+1=2. — Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 21:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
When was the city renamed, in 1991 or before? — Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 14:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
If someone knows more about the 150 metres tall wooden radio tower in Kharkiv, which stood there before World War II than please write something about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.202.170 ( talk) 20:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey everyone! Just wanna tell my opinion about Kharkov vs Kharkiv problem. I was born in Kharkov and I live in Kharkov now. You khow, people in Kharkov spoke Russian during Soviet times and still speak Russian in spite of all goverment attempts to change it. This is not going to change. Local language does not change because of any changes in the country. I'll tell nothing about any poll results, google search comparisons, because the main massage is clear: Kharkov and Kharkovites speak Russian. I don't think anyone will argue about this. Russian language has special status in Kharkov according to the city goverment. Kiev is Kiev, Odessa is Odessa, just let us call our city as we want. Guys, I want to conclude: You can call Kharkov in whatever way, but we, Kharkovians, will admit just Kharkov, whatever official position is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.120.128.196 ( talk) 16:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey everyone! I have a different point of view. I recently defended my doctorate dissertation in February at the Kharkiv State Academy of Culture on Bursatsky spusk. All education courses are in Ukrainian except for the chinese and arabic students studying there. All the advertising, the Metro, the cinema is in Ukrainian. Ukrainian is spoken in all the suburbs of Kharkiv and the environs which are totally Ukrainian speaking, as opposed to Kyiv, where the suburbs are more russified. Even in the centre one now hears more Ukrainian and what is interesting is that if people are addressed in Ukrainian they answer in that language. Are we talking about the same city? Bandurist ( talk) 17:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Google search, pages from the UK only:
Evidently both spellings are currently used in English.-- Toddy1 ( talk) 17:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
The interesting thing with these discussions is that the preference of local people is not wanted by the people who want to change the English language spelling to some foreign spelling. All this stuff about the primacy of the Ukrainian language over the English language in English language wikipedia come for the most part from foreigners who live in USA or Canada.-- Toddy1 ( talk) 19:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |