Talk:Świętopełk II, Duke of Pomerania

message: I doubt that Świętopełk is used in English with these three diacritics. Why not the alternative, Swantopolk? No sources given, too. -- Matthead discuß!     O       23:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved back to original title, and added refs. -- Matthead discuß!     O       02:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is interesting indeed what is the English name of this person. Swantopolk seems to be used primarily by German sources (); Świętopełk by Polish (), both have been used in English but only by a few publications (...Świętopełk, the duke of Eastern (Gdańsk) Pomerania...The local duke, Swantopolk (1222-1266), for example, defended his rule victoriously...). None of them seem to have any significant advantage over the other in terms of which one is used more. Perhaps there is a variant we are missing; if not, whether to use German or Polish variant is not an easy question. Which language was primarily used by the subject, and did he use a Slavic or a Germanized version of his name himself?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Moving to Swietopelk II, Duke of Pomerania accordingly. -- Matthead  Discuß   00:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

text: The booksearch results for Swietopelk include other Swietopelks as well. Skäpperöd (talk) 06:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, those Google searches ... if English use is enforced by requiring eg. "+Swietopelk +duke", the numbers drop to 57 vs. 45. The first page for Swietopelk shows mainly Polish author names, a children's book, and the annoying "Mentioning By Icon Group International, Inc.", which also includes Wikipedia (Rumia). First page for Swantopolk shows international authors, and many works from the interwar period in which the early history of Danzig and the Polish Corridor areas are examined. It's safe to say that German POV was not popular outside Germany then (nor during WW2 or the Cold War). BTW, in 1244  the Duke lost a naval battle on the Nogat to the Order. -- Matthead  Discuß   11:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name? 

message: Are clear that the name Gdańsk is to be used till 1308.--Molobo (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A reference that Gdansk is also known as Danzig? What do you think the vote was about? Please be reasonable. Also, Gdansk (Danzig) perfectly fits the rules you mentioned, I'd really like to know which part of the rule makes you think it was ok to remove Danzig? Skäpperöd (talk) 17:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double naming rules 

message: The arbitrary 1308 date is incorrect,but was pushed on Wikipedia by a group of Molobos.
The German Law city of Danzig existed before 1308
see:
 coin of Zwantepolc de Danceke, Duke of Pomerania,(part of Holy Roman Empire). (71.137.197.160 (talk) 23:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  City of Danzig 

message: Much if not most of this article is invented Polish nationalist history and appears in no other European history books. Danzig and Pomerelia were never part of ethnic Poland and there is no evidence that during their various conquests of neighbours' territories that when they did march in it was a short time before they were thrown out. These pages on Wikipedia are a total discredit to history. 2A00:23C4:B617:7D01:CD0A:3F55:1684:7998 (talk) 11:55, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Fiction