| Revision as of 19:34, 14 October 2018 editKhajidha (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,066 edits →Requested move 12 October 2018← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 16:35, 1 October 2024 edit undoMacaddct1984 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,605 edits →Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 September 2024: Edit request not done at this time. (Edit Request Tool) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{FAQ}} |
|
{{Vital article|level=4 |class=B|topic=Geography}} |
|
|
|
{{American English}} |
|
{{Article history| action1 = PR |
|
|
|
{{Article history |
|
|
| action1 = PR |
|
| action1date = 17:45, 21 August 2005 |
|
| action1date = 17:45, 21 August 2005 |
|
| action1link = Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Kiev/archive1 |
|
| action1link = Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Kiev/archive1 |
|
| action1result = reviewed |
|
| action1result = reviewed |
|
| action1oldid = 21231490 |
|
| action1oldid = 21231490 |
|
|
|
|
|action2 =FAC |
|
|action2 =FAC |
|
|action2date = 17:42, 23 May 2006 |
|
|action2date = 17:42, 23 May 2006 |
| Line 12: |
Line 15: |
|
| action2result = failed |
|
| action2result = failed |
|
| action2oldid = 54754068 |
|
| action2oldid = 54754068 |
|
|
|
|
| action3 = GAN |
|
| action3 = GAN |
|
| action3date = 25 September 2007 |
|
| action3date = 25 September 2007 |
| Line 17: |
Line 21: |
|
| action3result = failed |
|
| action3result = failed |
|
| action3oldid = 160406080 |
|
| action3oldid = 160406080 |
|
|
|
|
| currentstatus = FGAN |
|
| currentstatus = FGAN |
|
| topic = Geography |
|
| topic = Geography |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|1= |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1= |
|
{{WikiProject Cities|class=B|importance=Top}} |
|
{{WikiProject Cities|capital=y}} |
|
{{WikiProject Ukraine|class=B |
|
{{WikiProject Ukraine| importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Former countries}} |
|
| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = yes |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Russia|importance=Low|hist=yes}} |
|
| b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = yes |
|
|
| b3 <!--Structure --> = yes |
|
|
| b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = yes |
|
|
| b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = yes |
|
|
|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Former countries|class=B|Soviet Union=yes|Russian Empire=yes}} |
|
|
{{WP1.0|v0.5=pass|class=B|category=Geography}} |
|
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Press|collapsed=yes |
|
{{tmbox |
|
|
|
| subject=article| title=#KyivnotKiev:#kyivfourrome Misplaced Pages changes spelling of Ukrainian capital| org=]| url=https://www.unian.info/kyiv/kyivnotkiev-wikipedia-changes-spelling-of-ukrainian-capital-news-kyiv-11150921.html| date=2020-09-18| quote=The press service suggested that the moderators decided to "rename" the article because of the growing use of "Kyiv" in English-language sources.| accessdate=2020-09-19 |
|
|
| subject2=article| author2=Daryna Antoniuk| title2=Kyiv not Kiev: Misplaced Pages changes spelling of Ukrainian capital| org2=]| url2=https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/kyiv-not-kiev-wikipedia-changes-spelling-of-ukrainian-capital.html?cn-reloaded=1&cn-reloaded=1| date2=2020-09-18| quote2=Misplaced Pages couldn’t change the mistake earlier because it just displayed the spelling that is most popular among prestigious international media outlets, the Ukrainian representative office of Misplaced Pages said.| accessdate2=2020-09-19 |
|
|
| subject3 = article |
|
|
| author3 = Stephen Harrison |
|
|
| title3 = How the Russian Invasion of Ukraine Is Playing Out on English, Ukrainian, and Russian Misplaced Pages |
|
|
| org3 = ] |
|
|
| url3 = https://slate.com/technology/2022/03/wikipedia-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-edits-kyiv-kiev.html |
|
|
| date3 = 1 March 2022 |
|
|
| quote3 = But before covering the latest developments, it’s worth revisiting one of the most brutal edit wars in Misplaced Pages’s history, which also says something about the Ukrainian spirit. The issue was whether the web encyclopedia should spell Ukraine’s capital as “Kyiv” or “Kiev.” |
|
|
| accessdate3 = 1 March 2022 |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=b}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Talk:Kyiv/naming/old discussion list}} |
|
{{Old moves |
|
|
| title1 = Kiev |
|
|
| title2 = Kyiv |
|
|
| list = |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''Snow, not moved''', 3 October 2017, ] |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''Snowball, not moved''', 9 November 2013, ] |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''No consensus''', 26 November 2012, ] |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''Not moved''', 5 November 2009, ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A special subpage has been created for discussing the '''name''' of the article, ''']'''. Please take all naming discussion there! |
|
|
| oldlist = |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''Not moved''', 30 September 2008, ] |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''No consensus''', 22 February 2008, ] |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''No consensus''', 16 September 2007, ] |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''No consensus''', 5 September 2007, ] |
|
|
*RM, Kiev → Kyiv, '''No consensus''', 30 July 2007, ] |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
| algo = old(90d) |
|
| algo = old(90d) |
|
| archive = Talk:Kiev/Archive%(counter)02d |
|
| archive = Talk:Kyiv/Archive %(counter)d |
|
| counter = 9 |
|
| counter = 11 |
|
| maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
| maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
| archiveheader = {{TalkArchive}} |
|
| archiveheader = {{Aan}} |
|
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
| minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
| minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{annual readership|scale=log}} |
|
{{Archive box| |
|
|
|
{{top 25 report|Feb 20 2022}} |
|
{{PrefixIndex|Talk:Kiev/Archive|redr=no|stripprefix=yes}} |
|
|
|
{{Archives|title=Naming archives (])|root=Talk:Kyiv/naming|search=yes}} |
|
;Naming issue |
|
|
{{PrefixIndex|Talk:Kiev/Naming issue|redr=no|stripprefix=yes}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
__TOC__ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== External links modified == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians, |
|
|
|
|
|
I have just modified 4 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: |
|
|
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203020408/http://www.ucipr.kiev.ua/publications/electronic-bulletin-your-choice-2012-issue-4-batkivshchyna/lang/en to http://www.ucipr.kiev.ua/publications/electronic-bulletin-your-choice-2012-issue-4-batkivshchyna/lang/en |
|
|
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://archive.is/20120530043944/https%3A//tspace.library.utoronto.ca/citd/RussianHeritage/4.PEAS/4.L/12.III.5.html |
|
|
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.jpeopleworld.com/index.php?dir=site&page=country&subj_cs=4755 |
|
|
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ukma.kiev.ua/eng_site/index.php |
|
|
|
|
|
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Kiev in Ukrainian SSR == |
|
|
|
|
|
This text: ''From 1921 onwards Kiev was a city of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which was proclaimed by the Red Army'' |
|
|
It is not quite true. Kiev was taken by the Red Army on June 12, 1920, and from that time the city was part of Soviet Ukraine. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 16:18, 6 July 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
Kiev is incorrect, please change to Kyiv this is really official name city in this time Kiev does not exist ] (]) 09:56, 5 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:It does in English. --] (]) 10:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 9 August 2018 == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Kyiv|answered=yes}} |
|
|
] (]) 15:03, 9 August 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{ping|Vladzymovin}}, what change, specifically, do you want made? ~ '']''<sup>(]|])</sup><small>]</small> 16:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a ] if appropriate.<!-- Template:ESp --> '']'' <small>'']''</small> 17:23, 9 August 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== WTF is "most <...> pro-democracy region"? == |
|
|
As opposed to what? Are other regions pro-I don't know-totalitarism or something? And even if it is something outlandish like this, how this pro-democratiness was measured and why it is "most" expressed in Kiev? This all sounds like some flowery non-NPOV language. --] (]) 20:43, 2 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Requested move 12 October 2018 == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{requested move/dated|Kyiv}} |
|
|
|
|
|
] → {{no redirect|Kyiv}} – Requested by the ]... "Kiev" is a ], colonial name of the original 1500-year old Ukrainian toponym. "Kyiv" is approved by the United Nations. The conferences on Standartization of geographic names. The UN group of experts on Geographical names. And most english media outlets not controlled by the Kremlin. ] (]) 06:46, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose'''. Most English media outlets are not controlled by the Kremlin. The evidence is still overwhelming that ] is still "Kiev". --] (]) 08:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose''' for the reasons in the 9 previous RMs at ]. ]★] -- 08:51, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose''' - This was done a year ago with a snowball keep for Kiev. I see nothing from those discussions to warrant anything different this go around. Kiev is the common English spelling and what a foreign govt wants has no bearing here. ] (]) 08:56, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose''' also from me, the nominator apparently did not take the trouble to read previous discussions.--] (]) 09:03, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*:A pretty new editor (June 2018) so they might not have realized and read all the nominations from before. ] (]) 09:07, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*:: To be honest, they look like a pretty old editor (I once almost blocked them already), but let us complete the RM this time.--] (]) 09:16, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*:::Given all their involvement in various "behind the scenes" parts of Misplaced Pages, I find it hard to believe that they are a true new editor. They seem like someone returning under a new name. --] (]) 13:41, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose''' per everything mentioned by everyone else. --] (]) 09:18, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose, and next editor please ] close''' Suggest a moratorium of 12 months till next attempt. ] (]) 13:42, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Support'''. As more and more English-language publications use "Kyiv", the common transliteration in English is shifting, as it did with Peking, Bombay, and Calcutta, and various other city-name transliterations. See for instance '''Google Ngram''': In English-language books, usage of "Kiev" has been steadily declining since 1960, and usage of "Kyiv" has been steadily increasing since 1990 . Google Ngram only goes up to 2008 (an entire decade ago), and one may imagine that give these trajectories, and given the increasing desire of English-language authoritative reliable sources to conform transliterations to official and/or nationalistic standards (as with Peking and other Chinese cities, Bombay, and Calcutta), that "Kyiv" will eventually, and probably quite soon, become the English-language standard. See '''Google Scholar''', which shows the continuation of the trend: For instance on Google Scholar, 2008-2009 Kyiv = 18,300 ; Kiev = 41,500: . 2009-2010 Kyiv = 17,000 ; Kiev = 24,000 . 2010-2011 Kyiv = 25,700 ; Kiev = 44,000 . 2011-2012 Kyiv = 18,600 ; Kiev = 24,300 . 2012-2013 Kyiv = 41,600 ; Kiev = 49,300 . 2013-2014 Kyiv = 20,100 ; Kiev = 25,500 . 2014-2015 Kyiv = 53,300 ; Kiev = 46,300 . 2015-2016 Kyiv = 23,000 ; Kiev = 20,400 . 2016-2017 Kyiv = 43,000 ; Kiev = 39,400 . 2017-2018 Kyiv = 18,300 ; Kiev = 17,300 . 2018-present Kyiv = 15,100 ; Kiev = 13,500 . Therefore on Google Scholar, '''Kyiv has exceeded Kiev for the past 5 years.''' That's a very clear trajectory that matches and extends that of Google Ngram, which only goes up to 2008. It's very clear where the trajectory is headed; the fact that five years in a row Kyiv has exceeded Kiev is a clear indication that, as shown in the Google Ngram, Kyiv is soon going to overtake Kiev as the standard for reliable English-language sources. ] (]) 02:16, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::The only commment I'll make on this is that "shifting" is not "shifted". Misplaced Pages is reactive once there is clear and unambiguous evidence that common English usage has definitely changed. It is not proactive, pushing an agenda, whether that agenda is laudable or not. "Kyiv" may be becoming more common, but it has not yet supplanted "Kiev". --] (]) 02:59, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::It certainly has on Google Scholar. And it also has on GoogleBooks; for books published in the 21st century, "Kiev" gets 11 results (9 visible) , and "Kyiv" gets 14 results (13 visible) . -- ] (]) 03:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::In most hits provided by google books, "Kyiv" is a mailing address. I am not sure that is an indication of a shift in English literture.--] (]) 04:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::And one of the most common problems cited in the literature with Ngram searches is that it skews toward scientific literature, not common English sources: . For example, searching the New York Times from 1 Jan to 12 Oct of this year, there are and only . --] (]) 04:27, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::::Even if the situation were opposite, NYT does not set the rules of English language. These rules are pretty rigid, and we cannot change it according to present days political situation. Again, the name of the country where Kiev is a capital is Oukraeena (that is more correct phonetic name, but we do not care that in English this name is "Ukraine".--] (]) 04:45, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::::I'm sorry that I wasn't clear. I did not choose the New York Times because it was some sacred arbiter of English usage. I simply listed the NYT as a single example of a media source where the use of "Kiev" is overwhelming. I could have listed a dozen major English language news outlets that all use "Kiev" consistently (with "Kyiv" reserved only for "Kyiv Dynamo"). Those dozen media sources probably have more readers '''''per day''''' than the total readership over time of most of the books on Google Scholar or Google Books combined. That's why it's critical to consider mass media as one of the data points in any discussion of a name change. In this case, it's been demonstrated over and over, almost annually, that the majority of the largest news media outlets in the English-speaking world still use "Kiev" overwhelmingly. This includes major media sources on both sides of the Atlantic, such as the Guardian and the Economist. It's not just about how many data points scholars create for the 10 people who read their books, it's about how many millions of readers actually see "Kiev" every day in their reliable sources for news and information. --] (]) 09:01, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::The NYT usage is even more lopsided than those numbers would seem to indicate. The 5 uses are in only 4 articles and are all references to entities other than the city itself (Kyiv FREE Couch, Kyiv Post (twice), Kyiv Security Forum, Kyiv School of Economics). --] (]) 19:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::PS: Only one of those 4 articles references the city itself. And it uses "Kiev" to do so. --] (]) 19:16, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::@PaulSiebert: In terms of the 13 visible "Kyiv" GoogleBook results from the 21st C (as opposed to only 9 visible of Kiev for the 21st C), 7 '''are in the titles of the books''', and of the remaining 6 only one is a mailing address (the ''World Guide to Libraries''), so the results are not "a mailing address". ] (]) 07:41, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::Yes, mailing addresses are ''among'' these hits, which make the search results not an adequate indicator. Anyway, 13 hits is too samll number to draw any conclusion about trends.--] (]) 15:08, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Regarding recent scholar results, that is not an indication, because "Kiev" include the hits that refer to some prolific author whose last name is "Kiev". With regard to "Kyiv", most hits are the articles authored by people from this city: their mailing address include this name, hence the hits.--] (]) 04:49, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::As other editors have pointed out, the use of Scholar and Books here is misleading. It is picking up false positives such as mailing addresses and very specialist literature, not mainstream English-language sources. ] (]) 06:15, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::@PaulSiebert: Do you realize that "{{xt|'Kiev' include the hits that refer to some prolific author whose last name is 'Kiev'}}" is a rationale in favor of the use of "Kyiv"? ] (]) 07:50, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::Yes, that is what I mean. I also note that many "Kyiv" hits are because a modern mailing address is "Kyiv", not "Kiev". That makes ''both'' figures not a good indicator.--] (]) 15:08, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Support''' per nomination and per superbly detailed !vote by Softlavender. ] → ] is not a name change in the manner of ] → ] → ], but rather a transliteration adjustment comparable to ] → ]. Governments in the English-speaking world, guidebooks, online maps — the trajectory is inexorable and inevitable. ] <small>] • ]</small> 04:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::It may be inexorable, but it has not happened yet. ]'s numbers have been cherry-picked and, of course, do not reflect the full range of English-language usage. For example, among the major media markets in the English-speaking world, "Kiev" is still overwhelmingly the usage. And what is the average speaker of English more likely to encounter? A book on the history of St. Sophia's cathedral listed in Google Scholar, or the New York Times? And as was discussed earlier on ], "Kiev" is not a transliteration. It is still the common English name for Ukraine's capital city, just like "Warsaw" is the common English name for Poland's capital city. --] (]) 04:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::That is not our goal to predict a trajectory. Our goal is to reflect a current state of things.--] (]) 04:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*'''Oppose''' Our goal is not to anticipate future trends, but to reflect what majority sources say. In addition, I am not sure local name convention can affect the rules of English language. Thus, in Russian, the name of Russian capital is "Moskva", but its English name is "Moscow", Germans call themselves "Deutsch", but we still are calling them "Germans"; a self-name of is , but we use "Sweden". The English name of is , and we do not care how do Danish people call it. In addition, the old historical name of Ukrainian capital is "Kiev", not "Kyiv", hence the name "" (not . In Belorussian, Kiev is also "Kieu", which means in old Russian (the language all three modern Eastern Slav languages, Russian, Belorussian and Ukrainian originated from) the name of this city was "Kiev", and it is not a "russified, colonial name", but a historical name of this city. (Actually, an old historical name of the city was "Kyjev", which is in between a modern Russian "Kijev" and modern Ukrainian "Kyiv" names). |
|
|
:Interestingly, gives more hits in Google scholar than , but nobody tried to rename the English article about ]. Guys, we are '''English''' Misplaced Pages, and we must obey the rules of English language.--] (]) 04:15, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose''' This is the latest disruptive instalment in a long-running push by special interests and a government to force global English-language usage to change. We don't act at the demand of dodgy Eastern European regimes. The rationale supporting the move is absolutely bogus. Kiev is not the "Russian" name for the city. It is the English name for the city. The Russian name is Киев, transliterated as Kiyev. Nom says that "Kyiv" is used by "most english media outlets not controlled by the Kremlin" - but failed to provide a shred of evidence for either the first assertion about usage or the second paranoid conspiracy theory that English-language media is controlled by the Kremlin. Support a 12-month moratorium on other move requests. ] (]) 06:13, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::"{{xt|The Russian name is Киев, transliterated as Kiyev.}}" The Russian Киев is generally transliterated as "Kiev" (from which the traditional English spelling stems, and the pronunciation is similar), which is why Ukrainians and Ukrainian-speaking peoples do not like the use of "Kiev", which is Russian and does not look or sound like the Ukrainian-language word Київ (Kyiv {{IPA-uk|ˈkɪjiu̯||Uk-Київ.ogg}}). ] (]) 08:13, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::But regardless of how it is spelled, Kiev or Kyiv, in English it will likely always sound like Kiev when pronounced. I've seen several people spell it Kyiv but they still pronounce it as key-ev. ] (]) 08:31, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::No English speaker who isn't also a native speaker of Ukrainian pronounces Київ as . They pronounce it, at best, as or ("keev" or "kee-iv"). In other words, it's virtually identical in pronunciation to . --] (]) 09:10, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::"]" is virtually identical in pronunciation to "]" and yet it is written "Kolkata". The pronunciation is immaterial as long as the Ukrainian capital's name is written in English as "]". ] <small>] • ]</small> 15:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I'd hazard a guess that very few native English speakers (at least those without a severe hearing impairment) would consider {{IPA|/koʊlˈkɑːtə/}} and {{IPA|/kælˈkʌtə/}} to be "virtually identical". '']'' <small>'']''</small> 15:57, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Once again, the matter of pronunciation is basically immaterial to the subject at hand. It varies widely across the entire English-speaking world with some pronouncing the city's name in the same manner that they had pronounced the familiar "]" (as in the ]) and others aiming for "Kohl-kah-tah". The key point is the written form, "]". Some will pronounce "]" as they pronounced "]" except with an "M", "Mombay" — others will aim for "Moom-bah-yee", but the English written form is "]". Some will pronounce "]" the same as its outdated form, "]", while others will try for "Krah-koov", but the modern written form is "]" (or "]"). The same with "]" — some will pronounce it in the same manner as the outdated Russian form, used in the dish ] (analogous to ]), while others will try "Kih-yeev". The key point to emphasize is that the written form is "]". ] <small>] • ]</small> 18:54, 14 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Nobody pronounces Kolkata as Calcutta. If they say Calcutta, they also write Calcutta. And nobody pronounces Mumbai as Mombay, either. They may say "mum-bye", but not "mombay". --] (]) 19:34, 14 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose''' the English Misplaced Pages uses the common spelling in English, which is the current title. If usage of a different spelling increases, we can change it then. ] (]) 06:16, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Comment''' Usage of Kiev as recently as today by the and the , but I assume nom will blithely dismiss these outlets as "Kremlin controlled". Much easier than actually putting forward a credible argument. ] (]) 06:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose'''. The ] is still "Kiev" and the nom doesn't argue that it isn't. "Kiev" is not in this case a Russian name or a Ukrainian name, but the longstanding English name for the city. '']'' <small>'']''</small> 09:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose''' Lets keep the russian name, it is more used and easier to pronounce. ] (]) 10:10, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
*WP:Common name does not apply here because this is the same name. We are talking about different ''transliterations'' of the same name. Relevant guideline is . It tells only that we must "follow English-language usage". Right now there are two different ''commonly used'' transliterations in English (4 million for Kyiv in Google news is a lot). However, only one of these common English spellings corresponds to ''local spelling'', and that is Kyiv. Therefore, I would '''support''' the renaming. ] (]) 15:31, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::"Kiev" is '''''not''''' a transliteration any more than "Prague" or "Moscow" are. It is the name of Ukraine's capital in English. And when you start to use raw numbers for the occurrence of "Kyiv" in Google anything, you must find a way to separate "Kyiv Post" and "Kyiv Dynamo", which alone account for a disproportionately large number of hits, as well as city addresses that include "Kyiv" and other proper names that are not part of the actual usage in prose text. is a classic example that is more common than not: The article about soccer (football) uses "Kiev" throughout dozens of times, but then lists "Kyiv" once as the proper name of a business there and once as the name of "Kyiv Post" (an English-language Ukrainian media outlet). That page should not be counted as a "Kyiv" usage. I don't believe that "4 million hits" in Google News without a corroborating link and a comparison to "Kiev" and a relevant time frame. I seriously doubt that most of that usage is in English. But this is a fundamental misunderstanding--"Kiev" is not a transliteration. That's just a simplistic notion. "Kiev" is the English name on a par with "Warsaw", "Rome", and "Moscow"--they're English, not direct forms of the native name and not transliterations anymore (all of them began as direct forms and/or transliterations, of course, but no English speaker transliterates when he/she writes "Moscow" or "Kiev"). --] (]) 15:58, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Are you saying that the difference between "Kiev" and "Kyiv" is not transliteration? Is not it the same name? I think it is. Yes, it was 4 million hits (Kyiv) versus 8 million hits (for Kiev) in Google news. A disclosure: I am not a native English speaker. ] (]) 16:09, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::English "Kiev" is a transliteration of an ''Old Russian'' (or ''Old East Slav'') "Kiev". The modern Russian word "Kiev", as well as the modern Ukrainian word "Kyiv" are different words that sound differently. The only problem that cause violent nationalistic reaction is that the English word coincides with Russian transliteration. I am pretty sure if the English word were, e.g., "Keev", Ukrainian nationalists had no problems with that.--] (]) 17:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::You are confusing "transliteration" with the establishment of a name in English. Once a name is established in the English language as a name, it ceases to be a transliteration. My first name is "John". A thousand years ago it was a transliteration from Hebrew. My first name is no longer a transliteration when used in English, it is English. The same thing is true of "Moscow". It was once a transliteration from some Slavic language, but it is no longer a transliteration. Several hundred years ago (I don't know how long), the name "Kiev" was transliterated from some local eastern Slavic dialect (depending on how long ago that was it is impossible to accurately call it "Ukrainian", at least "Modern Ukrainian"). Since then the spelling has been solidified as the English name of the city, not a recurring transliteration. Transliteration happens at the moment of use. Once a spelling is solidified in a language, it's not transliteration anymore. "Israel" is not a transliteration in English even though it once was. "Baghdad" and "Cairo" are not transliterations in English even though they once were. No. "Kiev" is not a transliteration, it is the modern name of Ukraine's capital in the English language. "Kyiv" is a transliteration from Modern Ukrainian. While it is being used more often (and 4 million hits versus 8 million hits for "Kiev" is not an argument for a change of this article's name), it is still just a minority of usage versus "Kiev". --] (]) 16:27, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::::That may be a little bit off topic, but I doubt "Moscow" had ever been a transliteration. One of the names of the Great Duchy of Moscow (not a self-name) was "Moscovia"/"Moscowia", but it is more a medieval Latin name than a name in any conceivable Slavic language. Anyway, the toponyms in foreign languages have a long and complicated history, and would be senseless to change it in accordance to current political needs.--] (]) 04:33, 14 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Are Michael and Mikhail the "same name"? "Kiev" is the longstanding standard English name. It is derived from a transliteration from Russian. However, current writers do not have to sit down and figure out letter by letter what the Cyrillic letters in the Russian name best correspond with in the Latin alphabet every time they use the name, so it is not currently a transliteration. "Kyiv" is the standard transliteration of the Ukrainian name for the city. It has some usage in English writing, but does not seem to have displaced the more established "Kiev" as the most frequent form. --] (]) 16:33, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::@Khajidha. I agree with everything you say. Yes, "Kiev" is the longstanding standard English name, and it originally came from transliteration of Russian name. Yes, "Kyiv" is the standard transliteration of the Ukrainian name, and it did not displaced "Kiev" (yet) in English usage. Maybe it never will. But I only see that "Kyiv" (a name/a transliteration/whatever) is very commonly used in English and do not see any problem with using a ''common'' name that is simply more consistent with "local spelling". If I am in minority here, that's fine. ] (]) 19:02, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::It is A common name, but not THE common name. WP:COMMONNAME is about the MOST common usage in English. Kiev is still more common than Kyiv, though Kyiv is commonly used (that is, it is not a rare occurrence).--] (]) 19:05, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::MVBW appears to be arguing based on a rule for cases where "there are too few reliable English-language sources to constitute an established usage". It is fanciful to suggest that this applies to Kiev. '']'' <small>'']''</small> 16:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::No, you misunderstood. ] (]) 16:10, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The idea that "Kyiv" and "Kiev" is the same word is incorrect. There is a confusion here: there are ''three'' different words, "Kyiv" (a Ukrainian word), "Kiev" (an English word), and "Kijev"/"Kiyev" (a Russian word; Russian "Киев" is ''transliterated'' as "Kiev"; it is a rare case when a transliterated Russian word coincides with an English word). That is a rare coincidence that a Russian word transliterated from Cyrillic to Latin looks exactly as the English word, although they are two different words that are pronounced differently. |
|
|
:Another example is the word "Ukraine". It is an English word, because Ukrainian word is "Ukraina". Incidentally, the Russian word is exactly the same, "Ukraina". In this case, we also have a situation when two words in two languages (Ukrainian and Russian) coincide, but the third word (an English "Ukraine") is different. Interestingly, that causes no discomfort, and noone proposes to rename the "Ukraine" article.--] (]) 16:45, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::Even though Ukraina (or Ukrainia) would help avoid the "the Ukraine" usage that many Ukrainians also hate. --] (]) 16:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::"The Ukraine", "The Gambia", "The Hague" - these are the rules of English language. I do not understand why all of that can insult anyone in clear mind. |
|
|
|
|
|
:::BTW, "Ukrainia" is an imitation of a Greek name, similar to "Rossia"/"Russia" (literally, "a land of Rus'/Ros"), "Francia" (a land of Franks), "Germania" (a land of Germans), etc. The problem is that, whereas Germans was some ethnic group, no ethnic group called "Ukres" ever existed... --] (]) 17:02, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:Re "However, only one of these common English spellings corresponds to local spelling, and that is Kyiv." Actually, a ''local spelling'' is "Kiev", because this city is Russian speaking. More importantly, the argument that we have to stick with a local spelling works only when such a word does not exist in English. That looks odd: all names of important European cities have an old history of their usage in foreign languages. That means, their foreign names formed many centuries ago, and reflect a historical tradition. No Russian complains "Moskva" is called "Moscow" in English. Italians are quite comfortable with "Turin (they themselves call it "Torino"). I already provided other examples. In that situation, the idea to rename the article to a just because coincides with a transcription of a Russian word is totally ridiculous. |
|
|
|
|
|
:Just reiterate: '''Webster says: "Kiev" is a Ukrainian capital, and "Kyiv" is a ''Ukrainian'' version of the word "Kiev". It does not say "Kiev" is a Russian word, so by default it is assumed that "Kiev" is an English word, and "Kyiv" is a Ukrainian word. The Russian name of this city is not mentioned at all.'''--] (]) 17:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
Actually, the article already puts all dots on i. It says: |
|
|
|
|
|
:''"'''Kiev''' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|k|iː|ɛ|f|,_|-|ɛ|v}} {{respell|KEE|ef|,_|-ev}})<ref>. '']''.</ref> or '''Kyiv''' ({{lang-uk|Київ|Kyiv}} {{IPA-uk|ˈkɪjiu̯||Uk-Київ.ogg}}; {{lang-ru|Киев|Kiyev}} {{IPA-ru|ˈkʲi(j)ɪf|}}; {{lang-orv|Кыѥвъ|Kyjev}}) is the capital and largest city of ], located in the north central part of the country on the ].(...) The early English spelling was derived from Old East Slavic form Kyjev (Cyrillic: Къıєвъ).''" |
|
|
|
|
|
It other words, it clearly discriminate ''four'' different words: |
|
|
|
|
|
# |
|
|
# |
|
|
# A Russian word "Kiyev", which, by incidence, upon transliteration (which is not a phonetic transcription) gives English "Kiev" |
|
|
# An ancient name of the city (which, pronounced as "Kyjev", and which was the source of a modern English word). |
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore, the rationale of the proposed RM ("''"Kiev" is a ], colonial name of the original 1500-year old Ukrainian toponym.''") is totally misleading: the English word "Kiev" has no more relation to the modern Russian name than to old historical name of this city. ''<u>Not only the nominator apparently did not take the trouble to read previous discussions, it seems he even didn't take a trouble to read the article itself</u>.'' |
|
|
|
|
|
Incidentally, taking into account that a standard epithet of Kiyjev (but not the modern "Kyiv") in old historical sources is "a mother of all Russian cities" (which is a literal translation of the Greek term "metropolia"), to call Kyjev/Kiev "a colonial name of the old Ukrainian name" is nonsense. In addition, there were no Ukrainian names 1500 years ago, because East Slav languages were separated on northern (Pskov-Novgorod) and southern (the rest of Kievan Rus') dialects. Russian, Belorussian and Ukrainian languages formed much later, after the word "Kiev" became an English word. |
|
|
|
|
|
I propose either to close this RM as wrongly formulated, or to re-formulate and reopen it. --] (]) 20:42, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:Things like RM's are rarely formulated perfectly and they are often done with bias on the creator. It's no big deal. The basic premise is still do we want Kiev or Kyiv, no matter what the creator said afterwards in the opening, and I think pretty much every editor realized that from looking at the responses. Let it run its course to a likely snowball close so we don't have to see it again for another year. ] (]) 21:17, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::There is a difference between an imperfect formulation (which is ok) and a wrong and misleading formulation.--] (]) 21:21, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Peh, it's not the first RM with a premise has more holes than a sieve. Are we really supposed to believe that ''Kyiv'' is "the original 1500-year old Ukrainian toponym" when it relies on a romanisation system from 1996? And has it really been adopted by "most english media outlets not controlled by the Kremlin"? Well, the BBC says very clearly in its : "Kiev is our preference for the capital of Ukraine and not Kyiv or other variations." Oh, so the BBC is Kremlin-controlled now? ''Really?'' |
|
|
|
|
|
:Reality is, it doesn't matter how you reformulate the RM, you'd expect it to reach the same result. There's a standard in ] that has to be met before we move, and it is clearly not met. Better to just let it run its course, and then let it close with yet another demonstration of the consensus against a move. '']'' <small>'']''</small> 21:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 January 2024 == |
|
*'''Oppose''' per ]. "Kiev" is by far the most common English spelling. ] (]) 03:04, 14 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit extended-protected|Kyiv|answered=yes}} |
|
==Way too early a close== |
|
|
|
Replace 'also written as Kiev' with 'outdated place-name Kiev' in the title block: as it misleadingly enable a russian promoted writing to continue being used. If clarification is needed, i propose to add 'formerly' into the statement as to emphasize its outdated nature. ] (]) 23:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
6–1 and opened for only 8 hours is way early for a snowball close in my opinion. Some editors wouldn't have ever seen that this rm ever happened. The closer is a non-admin, and it's supposed to be a little more obvious or run a week before they step in. I have informed the closer but there are times they don't edit for days or weeks, and it shouldn't be that long to re-open. This is for fairness as I've also been on the other side of these early closures. ] (]) 20:07, 12 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:{{not done}} The reality is that sources use Kiev, it is not misleading. See ] for more.<span style="font-family:Courier;"><b> // ] :: ] </b></span> 00:23, 31 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
:I have re-opened it. The move discussion should run for a full length and only be closed by an administrator. ] (]) 02:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::Replace 'also written as Kiev' with 'outdated place-name Kiev' in the title block: as it misleadingly enable a russian promoted writing to continue being used. ] (]) 02:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::It's neither Russian nor Ukrainian. It is the longstanding ENGLISH name that readers will still encounter. --] (]) (]) 03:05, 4 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::"Kyiv" spelling/pronunciation is the newspeak. It has not been used historically. ] (]) 04:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Right where it says in brackets of the article “(also spelled Kiev)”, can that tiny bit (at least) be updated to “(also spelled '''as''' Kiev)”? 🙂 (It only makes better sense that way). ] (]) 20:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== claimed 100k population - not one of the largest in the world == |
|
::You are not right. Any uninvolved user can ]. The only problem is that it was closed prematurely.--] (]) 04:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Exactly. If it runs for 3 days and is 50–2 I can totally understand a snow close. It could very well be a snow close anyway... I just want to make sure all is above board and fair. ] (]) 08:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Before Bogolyubsky's pillaging, Kyiv had had a reputation as one of the largest cities in the world, with a population exceeding 100,000 at the beginning of the 12th century" - |
|
== More about the city's name == |
|
|
|
this strikes my as wildly overblown, from looking at the ] list. 100,000 might have been large, for the region (although still considerably smaller than Constantinopole), but nowhere close to "one of the largest cities in the world", as that would have to compete with the likes of Baghdad and large cities in China. ] (]) 07:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Spelling error in lead section - "ninenteenth" == |
|
Currently, the article says: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Coming under Lithuania, then Poland and then Russia, the city would grow from a frontier market into an important center of Orthodox learning in the sixteenth century, and later of industry, commerce, and administration by the '''ninenteenth'''." ] (]) 23:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
:"''The form ''Kiev'' is based on Russian orthography and pronunciation {{IPA|}}, during a time when Kiev was in the ] (from 1708, a seat of a ]).<ref>https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/kiev</ref>''" |
|
|
|
:{{ping|Forvana}} Fixed. Thanks. ] (]) 23:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 September 2024 == |
|
However, the reference provided as a source is the reference to an online dictionary, and it does not contain any information to support this statement. If a better source is not provided, I'll remove this unsourced statement.--] (]) 20:56, 13 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit extended-protected|Kyiv|answered=yes}} |
|
The statement |
|
|
|
Change demographics GDP title from |
|
|
| demographics1_title1 = Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
To |
|
:"''The British government has also started using Kyiv.<ref> The National Archives, The official site of the Prime Minister's Office, Friday 31 July 2009</ref> ''" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| demographics1_title1 = ] and ] |
|
is a piece of original research. Actually, the document cited uses the word "Kyiv". The document says nothing about the position of the British government. This statement should be removed, or a source that supports the statement about the change of the position of the British government should be provided.--] (]) 03:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
] (]) 02:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done for now:'''<!-- Template:EEp --> It's not clear why that's an improvement over the current formatting, especially in a narrow infobox. – ] <sup>(] | ])</sup> 16:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC) |
Replace 'also written as Kiev' with 'outdated place-name Kiev' in the title block: as it misleadingly enable a russian promoted writing to continue being used. If clarification is needed, i propose to add 'formerly' into the statement as to emphasize its outdated nature. 204.48.92.168 (talk) 23:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
"Before Bogolyubsky's pillaging, Kyiv had had a reputation as one of the largest cities in the world, with a population exceeding 100,000 at the beginning of the 12th century" -
this strikes my as wildly overblown, from looking at the 11th-12th century city sizes list. 100,000 might have been large, for the region (although still considerably smaller than Constantinopole), but nowhere close to "one of the largest cities in the world", as that would have to compete with the likes of Baghdad and large cities in China. 2001:9E8:A344:B700:5070:174:C4AA:ACF4 (talk) 07:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
"Coming under Lithuania, then Poland and then Russia, the city would grow from a frontier market into an important center of Orthodox learning in the sixteenth century, and later of industry, commerce, and administration by the ninenteenth." Forvana (talk) 23:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
view · edit Frequently asked questions
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Not done The reality is that sources use Kiev, it is not misleading. See WP:KIEV for more. // Timothy :: talk 00:23, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Not done for now: It's not clear why that's an improvement over the current formatting, especially in a narrow infobox. – macaddct1984 16:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)