Talk:Zebrzydowski rebellion

message: Please take the trouble to change the English article's title to Zebrzydowski's Rebellion, leaving the name in Polish in the lead, is fine with me too. Dr. Dan 17:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone object to moving this to the Zebrzydowski Rebellion? --Irpen 07:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

text: 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 request to Zebrzydowski Rebellion approved. —Doug Bell talk 10:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Zebrzydowski's Rokosz → Zebrzydowski Rebellion — Bad style of using 's in the first word. Using English word Rebellion for the non-English one Rokosz Irpen 08:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
====Survey - in support of the move====
#Support. My proposal. --Irpen 08:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? Dr. Dan 21:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, much clearer now! Dr. Dan 01:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Add any additional comments:
*Are you proposing moving it to "Zebrzydowski Rebellion" or "Zebrzydowski's Rebellion"? Since it appears to be named after a person and not a group, region, etc, I can support the second (per Bacon's Rebellion or Pontiac's Rebellion) but not the first (per Boxer Rebellion or Red River Rebellion). --SigPig |SEND - OVER 11:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever is decided is fine with me. Anglicize it in the most logical way. Where from, and how often, does the title Sandomierz Rebellion appear. The article currently names four other major ring leaders besides MZ. Perhaps Sandomierz Rebellion is better? Dr. Dan 15:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I stand corrected. "The Zebrzydowski Rebellion" is what Britannica calls it, and gets 2x the ghits as the genitive form -- altho' the total number of hits barely exceeds 300, so it's not a good sample even from a Google perspective. That'll learn me to look things up first before I shoot my mouth off. --SigPig |SEND - OVER 15:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Most rebellions have a specificity or uniqueness of their own. Rokosz is a Polish term which doesn't lend itself to the English version of EN-WP. It needs to be Anglicized as was Elzbieta Rakuszanka (see her talk page history 04/27/06). Mr. Davies is nice to use the Polish term. I should hope the Encyclopedia Britannica supercedes his use of the term. Dr. Dan 17:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Britannica: , . Thank you for giving me the idea to verify the use of this term in Britannica :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any time, any time. And here's some more Britannica help. Kindly remember the issue at hand is the title, not whether the Polish term can be, or should be included in the article. I thought I had made that clear much earlier. Dr. Dan 18:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And you can also see that this particular incident is referred to as a "rebellion" by the same Britannica; which only goes to show that EB seems to be rather inconsistent. "Rebellion" is supported by WP:UE; on the other hand, there is its different shade of meaning (moreso even than that discussed in the  flap over the word département, I daresay). --SigPig |SEND - OVER 18:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: :Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
====Survey - in support of the move====
#Support. My proposal. --Irpen 08:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? Dr. Dan 21:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, much clearer now! Dr. Dan 01:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: #Support. My proposal. --Irpen 08:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in support of the move

message: #Object. Rokosz is a type of Polish rebellion. Here is an English-language source using this term: ,  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? Dr. Dan 21:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, much clearer now! Dr. Dan 01:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in opposition to the move

message: :Add any additional comments:
*Are you proposing moving it to "Zebrzydowski Rebellion" or "Zebrzydowski's Rebellion"? Since it appears to be named after a person and not a group, region, etc, I can support the second (per Bacon's Rebellion or Pontiac's Rebellion) but not the first (per Boxer Rebellion or Red River Rebellion). --SigPig |SEND - OVER 11:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever is decided is fine with me. Anglicize it in the most logical way. Where from, and how often, does the title Sandomierz Rebellion appear. The article currently names four other major ring leaders besides MZ. Perhaps Sandomierz Rebellion is better? Dr. Dan 15:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I stand corrected. "The Zebrzydowski Rebellion" is what Britannica calls it, and gets 2x the ghits as the genitive form -- altho' the total number of hits barely exceeds 300, so it's not a good sample even from a Google perspective. That'll learn me to look things up first before I shoot my mouth off. --SigPig |SEND - OVER 15:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Most rebellions have a specificity or uniqueness of their own. Rokosz is a Polish term which doesn't lend itself to the English version of EN-WP. It needs to be Anglicized as was Elzbieta Rakuszanka (see her talk page history 04/27/06). Mr. Davies is nice to use the Polish term. I should hope the Encyclopedia Britannica supercedes his use of the term. Dr. Dan 17:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Britannica: , . Thank you for giving me the idea to verify the use of this term in Britannica :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any time, any time. And here's some more Britannica help. Kindly remember the issue at hand is the title, not whether the Polish term can be, or should be included in the article. I thought I had made that clear much earlier. Dr. Dan 18:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And you can also see that this particular incident is referred to as a "rebellion" by the same Britannica; which only goes to show that EB seems to be rather inconsistent. "Rebellion" is supported by WP:UE; on the other hand, there is its different shade of meaning (moreso even than that discussed in the  flap over the word département, I daresay). --SigPig |SEND - OVER 18:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion