user_6110846 (2019-06-10 05:46:45+00:00): New Argument:
The rollback of the American film Chernobyl is no reason to use a fake name
The film tells about what happened once, our project maps today.


I am copying all the answers to the Hungarian cartographer, I expect him to write here his full text from the correspondence

On 2019-06-08 22:12:15 UTC Poliakoff Mykhailo wrote:
To begin with, Csornobil has the status of a confirmed translation in our discussion with you because I have given links and there he also has it in Wikipedia. And we will continue the long discussion on the basis of this
By the way, on the Internet, I can search for more links if you have little
What is the name of the site, or the name of the article in Wikipedia does not matter Where is it written in the rules of the project that ONLY the name of the article in Wikipedia is name: lang?
Where is it written that translation number two from a wikipedia article cannot be name: lang? It does not matter that Csornobil is not the title of the article. You yourself know what to register in Wikipedia, change the name of the station is very easy
In what recommendations it is written that a fake name from the state registry is more correct than a name on ground The name of Google Maps is not an argument at all.
The founder of Google is an emigrant from the USSR. Google maps only recently began Ukrainizing translations in European languages. Therefore, there is no reason to say that in the near future, Google’s fake Csernobil will remain on Google’s map. In Wikipedia, Csornobil is - this is enough for Google to fix the maps on Csornobil
 
 
About the registries provided by you - you forgot about the concept - we do not copy the registry and databases
This rule, the concept of the project, says that the local name is more important than what is written in different registries.
Why do you ignore permission from DWG to use real names? You inattentively read the text from DWG in the discussion about the translation of the capital of Ukraine. Read it again.
Your emphasis on the reins is to ignore the concept rules of not copying registries. This rule, as well as the rule on ground, is like a constitution, the basis of the project, is based on it
Second: state sources - so what People do not create problems for themselves and do not complicate their lives with unnecessary work; they simply copied, by habit, what was invented by Moscow without discussion with Ukrainians and without the consent of Ukrainians in the 20th century. Laziness is a character trait inherent in the representatives of all nations.
Also, I do not know the reputation of these public sources. They are written by living people. For example, I argue that the author of these registers could intentionally ignore Csornobil and write only Russian Csernobil For example, in Germany, the publisher issued a map of Ukraine where the decommunization of names was ignored, and the Crimea was mapped as part of Russia without any comments or comments on the status of the disputed territory or occupied territory.
9 June 2019 at 11:55
You should know that Ukrainian cities in Hungarian are recorded in two ways: historical unique name like Munkacs and transliteration It is wrong to call transliteration Csernobil a translation.
Csernobil is a transliteration from the Russian name Чернобыль . In the era of the USSR, the world used Russian names for the republics of the USSR Now, in Europe, for the majority of post-Soviet countries, Europe has stopped using fake Russian names and has switched to transliteration from the Ukrainian language.
Please note that Csernobyl Kiev Odessza is Ukrainian cities that are in the Hungarian wikipedia under russian fake ( translatuion from the Russian language ) . Other cities in the Hungarian language instead of transliteration from the Russian language use transliteration from the Ukrainian language. Even Eastern Ukrainian Luhansk is in Hungarian under the present name transliteration from the Ukrainian language Luhanszk You have to understand the era of using russian fakes in Hungarian language is over.
You still do not understand the concept of the project: the local name is more important because it is on groundhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group So that the letter is not lost - send it 7 times (recommendation of the DWG representative in the Russian Federation at the forum of the Russian Federation)
Since in the future there will be repeated attempts to return the fantasy invented in Moscow in the 20th century without consulting with Ukrainians, then the discussion needs to be copied into a discussion box that is to make it available to everyone. We didn’t write anything to hide from prying eyes
9 June 2019 at 11:58


The discussion should be completely copied into the discussion box so that DWG reads the arguments of the two sides and takes an objective decision.