This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Piotrus (talk | contribs) at 16:31, 16 December 2007 (→Survey). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 16:31, 16 December 2007 by Piotrus (talk | contribs) (→Survey)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This template must be substituted. Replace {{Requested move ...}} with {{subst:Requested move ...}}.
Lithuania Stub‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Rename
This invented name have no support in English sources at all . While, Union of Vilnius has . So I am asking is there any opposition to rename this article from invented name to established one? M.K. (talk) 11:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Try WP:RM and see. Union of Vilna is not alien to English historiography (ex. ) and is just as popular as Union of Vilnius ().-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- I do not doubt that Union of Vilna could have hints in English, but current "evidence" which you brought is not about this specific event: replaced the Union of Vilna by the more stringent one of ... Under pressure from the Tatars and the Turks, the two countries in 1499 made another union .... claiming that in this citation Union of Vilna should be applied in this context is yet another ORirsh claim, prokonsul. And if you don't like Union of Vilnius, I can move it to 1499 Union of Vilnius as per English publication or to Union of Vilnius (1499). Oh, and I waiting for evidences which could support current name-invention, could you provide them? M.K. (talk) 10:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Requested move
Requested move
Union of Kraków and Vilna → Union of Vilnius (1499) — Current title is not present in English sources and reader could face difficulty searching and recognize it. New title used in English academic works, shorter and less confusing —M.K. (talk) 11:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Survey
- Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with
*'''Support'''
or*'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with~~~~
. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Misplaced Pages's naming conventions.
- Support, as I already presented (see above) current title is alien to English sources . New proposal is shorter and used in EN publication. M.K. (talk) 11:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Seems more correct for that time period.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
- Any additional comments: