| Revision as of 19:00, 5 June 2005 editJohn K (talk | contribs)Administrators59,942 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:43, 6 June 2005 edit undoHalibutt (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers34,067 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| This is a clearly specious interpretation of ]. Halibutt, you should be ashamed of yourself - this is really childish. I am happy to revisit that particular result of the poll to make it more specific, but this is absurd. ] ] 19:00, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) | This is a clearly specious interpretation of ]. Halibutt, you should be ashamed of yourself - this is really childish. I am happy to revisit that particular result of the poll to make it more specific, but this is absurd. ] ] 19:00, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) | ||
| ::Childish? I bet you could try to offend me in a more sophisticated way. Anyway, the ] ruling does not require any specific kind of source, it simply has to be a English language source, be it a fable, a fairytale, a tourist office ad... :) ]] 07:43, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:43, 6 June 2005
I'm fascinated to learn that the Polish for Mainz is Moguncja, but does it have much to do with this article, or indeed with the distinctly Rheinland, nowhere-near-Poland-whatsoever, character of the city? And how does the Gdansk vote affect this at all? Alai 16:28, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The Gdansk vote says specifically, that the cross-naming affects any place that has a shared Polish-German history. In this case, there has been a large Polish diaspora there in the 19th century, also there were Polish troops stationed there during the Napoleonic Wars. The city was German, the troops were Polish - so the history is shared.
- BTW, you might want to question this interpretation at Talk:Gdansk/Vote/discussion Halibutt 16:47, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
- Also see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Halibutt. -- Chris 73 Talk 16:48, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
- As to the rationale: for instance, in 1631 the town was occupied by Polish and Swedish forces. As to the name being mentioned in English language sources - google is your friend. Notify me on my talk page if you need any book sources as well. Halibutt 18:13, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
- Google mainly uses the name Mainz, so I don't accept Google as a reference that primarily uses the Polish name. Can you be more specific? Eugene van der Pijll 18:15, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Quite. The above search turns up around 200 hits, and they're exceptionally low-grade stuff. I'd like not merely book sources, but considerably more notable and authorative sources than , in either medium. Alai 18:26, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- But that link, http://www.moguncja.hotelsbedbreakfast.inn26.com/, is interesting, in that it is an international site, and it uses the Polish name. Oh, but wait: it uses the name Mainz as well. And http://www.mainz.hotelsbedbreakfast.inn26.com/ also exists, and uses "Mainz" twice, and "Moguncja" 0 times. Which makes "Mainz" the most common name there. Ah well... Eugene van der Pijll 18:31, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is a clearly specious interpretation of Talk:Gdansk/Vote. Halibutt, you should be ashamed of yourself - this is really childish. I am happy to revisit that particular result of the poll to make it more specific, but this is absurd. john k 19:00, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Childish? I bet you could try to offend me in a more sophisticated way. Anyway, the Talk:Gdansk/Vote ruling does not require any specific kind of source, it simply has to be a English language source, be it a fable, a fairytale, a tourist office ad... here you go then :) Halibutt 07:43, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)