Talk:John I Albert/Archive 1

message: :The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was move.  Philip Baird Shearer 17:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

message: The first name should be in English, not in Polish. This was a medieval monarch, no one cannot claim that Jan Olbracht is precisely his original name, spelling was not so established at that time. I have even seen a variant where he is Jan Wojciech, though that ois rarer. Marrtel 17:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wite Support or Oppose and an optional one-sentence reason. Longer parts of opinions then below at discussion.
* Support. As nominator. Use English. Marrtel 17:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because that reference uses the form Władysław II Jagiełło as well, at least when talking about him after he became a King of Poland, though it does call him Jogaila before 1384 which of course makes perfect sense (see ).  Anyway, this reference demolishes the claim that Jan Olbracht is not used in authoritative English language sources, as some have stated above. Balcer 08:15, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Obviously the support vote by the anonymous IP cannot count. That gives 18 support to 11 oppose, i.e. no concensus. Balcer 23:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: According to findings of Haukurth, Users Logologist, Anatopism and Mattergy presumably are operated by the same person. Shilkanni 23:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: As to my claim:Orionus, limited edits, appeared when the voting appeared. Too little edits to be considered right now.
--Molobo 00:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Why not try the rules that have been used very successfully for several centuries by the Poles themselves? -- Anatopism 06:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Why not? For the same reason the Polish Wiki doesn't follow English usage for English rulers. The Poles, furthermore, used Latin like the rest of medieval Europe in most documents for many centuries and thus Boleslaus would be better than Boleslaw (w/ diacritics), but I doubt you agree. But John doesn't correspond to the French Jean, yet we have John II of France. The "j" in John is even more different from the "j" in Juan, yet we have John II of Aragon. The fact is, the name Jan is John in English and we translate it as such. What I want to know is: who the hell's Jan bez Ziemi? Srnec 19:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amen, brother.  And who is Jerzy III Hanowerski or Wilhelm Zdobywca or Elżbieta II Windsor or any of the other English/British monarchs who ALL have polonized names.  That was my point on Talk:List of Polish monarchs -- it seems that all other Interwikis are allowed to use their native forms of names except English. AjaxSmack 21:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because only English Wikipedia is edited extensively by the international community.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ... and because few members of even fewer national communities edit the English Wikipedia intensively according to their POV, so that the international community has to clean up behind them. --Matthead 21:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move request Jan I Olbracht to John I of Poland

message: :Wite Support or Oppose and an optional one-sentence reason. Longer parts of opinions then below at discussion.
* Support. As nominator. Use English. Marrtel 17:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because that reference uses the form Władysław II Jagiełło as well, at least when talking about him after he became a King of Poland, though it does call him Jogaila before 1384 which of course makes perfect sense (see ).  Anyway, this reference demolishes the claim that Jan Olbracht is not used in authoritative English language sources, as some have stated above. Balcer 08:15, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Poll

message: If anyone would like to list here any users who have expressed an opinion in the survey who in the opinion of another editor, should be discounted from the survey, please list them under here. Then person who considers moving the page can then decide to discount them or not. --Philip Baird Shearer 23:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously the support vote by the anonymous IP cannot count. That gives 18 support to 11 oppose, i.e. no concensus. Balcer 23:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: According to findings of Haukurth, Users Logologist, Anatopism and Mattergy presumably are operated by the same person. Shilkanni 23:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: As to my claim:Orionus, limited edits, appeared when the voting appeared. Too little edits to be considered right now.
--Molobo 00:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on poll

message: We need a rule for the nomenclature of Polish rulers. It seems clear that the Manual of Style guidelines will not work very well here. See Talk:List of Polish monarchs. Srnec 03:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not try the rules that have been used very successfully for several centuries by the Poles themselves? -- Anatopism 06:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Why not? For the same reason the Polish Wiki doesn't follow English usage for English rulers. The Poles, furthermore, used Latin like the rest of medieval Europe in most documents for many centuries and thus Boleslaus would be better than Boleslaw (w/ diacritics), but I doubt you agree. But John doesn't correspond to the French Jean, yet we have John II of France. The "j" in John is even more different from the "j" in Juan, yet we have John II of Aragon. The fact is, the name Jan is John in English and we translate it as such. What I want to know is: who the hell's Jan bez Ziemi? Srnec 19:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amen, brother.  And who is Jerzy III Hanowerski or Wilhelm Zdobywca or Elżbieta II Windsor or any of the other English/British monarchs who ALL have polonized names.  That was my point on Talk:List of Polish monarchs -- it seems that all other Interwikis are allowed to use their native forms of names except English. AjaxSmack 21:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because only English Wikipedia is edited extensively by the international community.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ... and because few members of even fewer national communities edit the English Wikipedia intensively according to their POV, so that the international community has to clean up behind them. --Matthead 21:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Please note, that in the poll above, 
*
*
*
*
are confirmed sockpuppets . The outcome of the vote may change based on this information -- Chris 73 | Talk 22:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sockpuppetry