Talk:Ulaanbaatar/Archive 1

message: The transliterated name contains a font that at least I do not have.  All that is represented is in small rectangles.
L. Greg 03:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Try getting Code 2000 font.  —  AjaxSmack   06:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a solution; articles should be readable by people who have not reconfigured their computers for WP. Septentrionalis 16:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not a solution but it's something recommended at the technical note over here.  (A font install is not exactly a reconfiguration either.)  I added a (nominally incorrect) Template:SpecialChars to the article.  Maybe a new template like Template:Khmer characters is needed.  —  AjaxSmack    06:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Transliteration Problem

message: Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Support as nominator per WP:UE. —  AjaxSmack   06:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not an arm of the USA regime or UN.  (also compare East Timor, Czech Republic). —  AjaxSmack   08:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: First. Ulaanbaatar sum does not exist. Sums are in aymags only. If we claim aymag the province, a sum will be a county. Ulaanbaatar is not a county (sum) in any province (aymag). Official name of administrative unit for Ulaanbaatar is "Capital City" (Нийслэл in Mongolian). Last years it is discussion about new country administrative division into 4 regions (бусin Mongolian): North, Sout, East, West and Capital Ulaanbaatar. So, Ulaanbaatar is on the highest level.
Second. I is not any map at all. Bogomolov.PL 08:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ulaanbaatar is a city ("hot" or "khot" in Mongolian). The subdivisions are called duureg, I think.
Ulaanbaatar administrative unit name is Улсын нийслэл "State Capital" literally. "Хот" means city, like every aymag capital. "Дyyрег" is the Ulaanbaatar administrative subdivisions name (district). All Mongolian sources place duureg on the sum level. Sums subdivisions de nomine are "баг" (bag), former "brigade" (sum in socialist time was a collective or state farm, very often with area of several thosand sq. km, so on sum territory periphery vere bags with 3 - 10 small houses in every, in larger bags vere small schools). Many of bags are in ruins now, the rest are seasonally populated. Only small part of bags are populated, mostly if they are on the larger road so "гуанз" (small restaurant or lodge)and "дэлгyyр" (grocery) are the local bisiness. Tourist business also is possible reason for bag to exist. Bogomolov.PL 16:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ulaanbaatar sum map 

message: OK, I'm no expert on the finer points of article editing.  Is there any way to adjust the size of those boxes so that there isn't a vast expanse of white space before one gets to the actual text? Vidor 23:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which box(es) do you mean? For me the table of content is the only one that can cause some white area, and even that only when I set my browser window to full screen size (which on a large monitor is too big anyway). --Latebird 11:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a 17-inch (42 cm) monitor window.  When I click on the main page, I see the infoboxes on the right, and a vast expanse of white space where text should be.  The text of the article starts at a line parallel to the very bottom of the infobox, when it should start closer to the top.  Are other people not seeing it this way? Vidor 19:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't see a reason why it should do that. Sounds like a browser error. --Latebird 09:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: White Space

message: Dear Yaan! You posted UB 1,000,000 population information. 
First, I'm glad it is not your private opinion, but city officials opinion. 
Second, I have some comment.
Last two years population increase was 101 per day (2005) and 95 per day (2006). Officially population at 31 Dec. 2006 was 987,192. If at 11 of April it was 1,000,000 and so it was 12,808 increase in 101 days, what means 127 per day (1/3 more speed growth). 
But if we will compare last official number (28 Feb. 2007) 989,900 we will have  46 person per day increase rate in January and February, but if 42 days later was 1,000,000 so it was 10,100 increase in 42 days – 240 per day. This day rate was never noted in UB history, and is 5 times faster then at previous two months period.
Such kind of miracle happens if somebody wants to get a historic number at a historic day (April 11, a boar day of the year of the Boar). Newspapers and Mayor’s office declarations can't change the reality: UB will have 1,000,000 but at the end of this May or later.  May be now I can understand why March and April population figures were not published -  statistic office stopped publication, it is possible this data were in conflict with Mayor’s declarations. 
The best data source are regular statistic publications, not newspapers, I think.
Third, if you change population number, you need change pop. density value.
Bogomolov.PL 15:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Population number again

message: As a native Mongolian, I want to request moving this page to "Ulaanbaatar", as Ulaanbaatar is the name used in most publications, including the CIA World Factbook, the Embassy of the US in Mongolia, and the United Nations.
There is also the fact that when searched on Google, Ulaanbaatar gives 1,220,000 results, when Ulan Bator gives 737,000 results, meaning that most people prefer the Ulaanbaatar spelling.
Sincerely, --Chinneeb 09:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the place to change the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names), which mandate to use the established English name if one exists. The same discussion has been held several times already ([1], [2]), and the same three example sources have been cited every time. But that doesn't prove that "most people prefer" one or the other. The Google figures are meaningless, because they include results in many other languages than English. In short, as long as you don't provide any new evidence (eg. usage frequencies in printed publications), things will most likely stay the way they are. --Latebird 11:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible to have another discussion about the name again? And just one thing, if Ulan Bator really is the preferred name, why is the name still "Ulaanbaatar" on the Mongolia article? ChinneebMy talk 08:02, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I was the admin who closed that RM, and got dressed down for it, with a good reason (votecounting rather than analysis). The point is that with the time English usage tends to shift from Anglicized to more "native" names (cf. Kolkata, Côte d'Ivoire for one side of the medal, and Turin and Kiev which are perhaps going into that direction but aren't ther yet). Ulaanbataar seems to gradually replacing Ulan Bator, and it can be argued that it's more common now. In any case, since consensus can change, a new requested move is a reasonable thing to do, in my opinion. Duja► 08:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Once there are new arguments, it will be absolutely necessary to have a new discussion. Just repeating the old arguments is unlikely to get you a new consnsus, though. Some articles still use Ulaanbaatar simply because nobody has fixed them yet (I only fix them when I need to edit the respective section for other reasons anyway). --Latebird 17:39, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page name 

message: City Ulaanbaatar and Niislel (Metropolis) are different entities constitutionally. Niislel consists of 4 cities/towns, 3 of which are administratively treated as districts. Not city Ulaanbaatar, but Niislel is divided into districts. People usually mix up Ulaanbaatar and Niislel. Gantuya eng 15:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Official translation of Mongolian Constitution uses "Capital" not "Metropolis". Constitution clames Capital is divided into düüregs (not cities). So with "Metropolis" it is your private poin of view (POV) which is not provided in WP articles, but in discussion pages only. When we are talking about UB as administrative 1st level division unit we are including Nalaikh, Bagakhangai and Baganuur. The administrative status of them is identical to the rest of düüregs of the UB proper. You can find city proper population data at List of cities in Mongolia. But Nalaikh and Baganuur being cities de facto are not cities de jure. And dear Gantuya eng, I didn't post my düüregs map at UB page I think wright place for it is in düüregs article, but if you are inserting rasters, try put them accurately, please.Bogomolov.PL 16:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Niislel" is the Mongolian word for "capital". It does not signify a seperate entity, but just describes the fact that the national governement is located in UB. --Latebird (talk) 04:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: City and Metropolis