User talk:Švitrigaila

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Our forum[edit]

Welcome to the Romanian Wikipedia notice board! This page is a portal for all Romanian-related topics and a place for Romanian editors to gather and socialize and debate. Discussions are encouraged, in both English and Romanian. Post any inquiry under their relevant cathegory.

--Anittas 20:00, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Popes Stephen[edit]

Please present at Talk:Pope Stephen whatever evidence you have for your change there and at List of people by name: Step. Don't repeat it, as it merely sows confusion even if you are correct in thinking a change is needed.
--Jerzyt 02:33, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Stop editing on the basis of this plan, now, while it is discussed, or you will be blocked and reverted as vandal.
--Jerzyt 18:10, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I can't see any place where it is discussed. You are up to now the only one to protest. And you protest without giving any argument against what you call "my plan". I simply restore the correct names of those pages, that's all. Švitrigaila 21:15, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

_ _ At Talk:Pope Stephen#Termination of the doomed discussion, i've stated my intention of winding this up. If you intend to do more than leave it to editors more experienced and fluent on en: WP than you yourself, please say so soon.
_ _ Since writing those samples, i've reread, in more detail, your research on versions of numbering the Stephens, and i see that you were focusing on pre-1961 sources (contrary to the impression you gave me before i skimmed it). Thus my wording reflects my misconception that i rcved from you, that i kept repeating, and that you never explicitly contradicted, that the old Cath Ency reflected a universal consensus. When i do up my templates, i'll reword accordingly. But that does nothing to alleviate the fundamental disfunctionality of the ToP Dab scheme, which i have now stated much more explicitly, and which AFAI can see you have never addressed.
_ _ As i say also on the page i already cited, thank you for your very valuable contribution in alerting us to the ambiguity of the numbering system.
--Jerzyt 17:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your invitation to participate in the discussion about the titles of articles on popes named Stephen. I have been aware of this discussion over the past few weeks - but have purposefully not contributed since I have not as yet come to any subsantial conclusions. It is a very sticky question. Noel S McFerran 10:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Pope Christopher[edit]

If the Catholic Church accepts Pope Christopher as legitimate, such as is proved by the Catholic Encyclopedia entry, it is for you to prove that he is not a legitimate pope according to the Church by citations. I can see none (the offhand talk of "Annuaria Pontificio" means nothing, as the public is not provided an opportunity to verify this claim). Please do not impose yourself as super-pope to define who is and who is not pope. Please restore the Pope Christopher entry back to its original status - unless you can provide genuine citations.

I won't answer any anonymous request. Švitrigaila 07:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Pope moves[edit]

I've moved S3 to S2 now. Please tell me as soon as you've sorted out the links, so that I can move S4 to S3 next. Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 08:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much! :o)))) I've sorted all the links out. I've left only 8 links to Pope Stephen III because they point effectively to this pope. I've left all the links from talk pages and user pages, for historical reasons. I've even sorted interwikis. The only problem will be with this template. I don't know how to modify it and I think it's better to wait all the other moves have been made. I'm ready for the next step: S4 ---> S3 Švitrigaila 11:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I've moved S4 to S3 now. —Nightstallion (?) 11:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Excuse me if I'm slow, but I am working. I'm ready for the next step: S5 ---> S4. Švitrigaila 12:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
No problem at all, take your time. S5 to S4 has been done. :) —Nightstallion (?) 12:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Done. ... It's a bit tiring ... What kind of weather do you have in Austria? ... Oh, back to work again, no time to breath? ... Then, next step: S6 --> S5. Švitrigaila 13:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I'd expect it to be tiring, yeah... Thanks for doing it, BTW. =] The weather is pretty spring-like in Austria currently, maybe a bit warmer than I'd prefer (around 24°C, I guess; I'd prefer 15°C–18°C =]). And in France? S6 to S5 has been done. —Nightstallion (?) 14:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Das war ein Stückarbeit. Ich weiß nicht sicherlich, was es meint, aber es scheint gut. ... Hier im Zentrum des Paris ist das Wetter heiß. Vielleicht zu heiß, aber es gibt hier ein Proverb: Mann soll wissen, was er will. ... Next step, please: S7 ---> S6 (a big one, I'm afraid). Švitrigaila 14:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure I've understood all of that (I've tried translating it into English literally and then translating it into proper German =]), but... erm... Yes. Anyway. S7 is now S6. We're close to the end... ;) —Nightstallion (?) 15:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
My German is very poor. But my Austrian is worse. I'm ready for the next move : S8 ---> S7. I hope we'll have finished before Stephen X's election. Švitrigaila 22:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I hope so, too; S8 to S7 has been done. =] —Nightstallion (?) 13:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Done. Ещё раз! S9 ---> S8. Švitrigaila 14:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
S9 to S8 has been done, and we're almost done, too. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 17:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
It's done! The last one now! S10 ---> S9. And you will offer the Champagne! :o) Švitrigaila 19:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Finally! ::opens the champagne, and orange juice for himself:: =] —Nightstallion (?) 20:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Irish parliamentary constituencies[edit]

Hi Švitrigaila, I saw you had voted on the discussion at Category talk:Parliamentary constituencies in the Republic of Ireland about my proposal to move some of the articles. I have posted a reply to the disccssion so far, at Category talk:Parliamentary constituencies in the Republic of Ireland#The_case_for_a_consistent_naming_format, and wondered if you might like to take a look and see if I can persuade you to change your mind?

Thanks for your reply! --BrownHairedGirl 19:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


Would you care to visit at Talk:Wladyslaw_II_Jagiellon_of_Poland#Survey. The simple "Jagiello" - for that there is now a formal listing going on to sign support or opposition. ObRoy 21:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, those disussion is to long. I can't read it at all. My opinion about the subject is that every "title" should be excluded from the articles's name. For exemple, Pope John Paul II should be renamed into John Paul II. In Jagiello's case, I'm in favor of a simple title. Either Ladislaus II, or Jagiello, or Jogaila... (I don't know what is the most commonly used name in English). I strongly oppose:
  • Any variants in the article's title itself (for example Ladislaus V/II...) As a rule an article's name must chose only one variant, or else, you can rename Tighina into Tighina/Bender/bendery or 2003 invasion of Iraq into 2003 invasion/liberation of Iraq...
  • Any title that is not part of the name itself (for example Ladislaus II of Poland or King Ladislaus II) Or else, why not writing President George W. Bush or Benedict XVI of Vatican ?
  • Any foreign forms for kings' names or historical figures only, when an English form exists (for example Władysław II) Or else, we can rename Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor into Carlos V.
If this system produces serveral articles with the same name, and only in this case, let's use disambiguation in parenthesis as for any other such articles. Let's write Alexander I (pope), instead of Pope Alexander I, as there are Chicago (band) and Chicago (poker game).
The naming conventions as they exist now are a mess. You find articles' names like Švitrigaila (no title), Pope Alexander I (with a title) , Antipope Gregory VIII (as if antipope were an official title!), Avignon Pope Benedict XIII (why not Avignon Antipope?),Emperor Meiji (official posthumous name, with the title before the name), Hirohito (familiar first name never used in Japan), Charlemagne (without a title or a country name), Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor (with the title after the name), Charles X Gustav of Sweden (English name), Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden (Swedish name)... I think we really need a coherent system.
Švitrigaila 08:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

FYI, moves are also debated at Zygmunt I the Old, Zygmunt II August and Zygmunt III Vasa.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

List of state leaders by date[edit]

Hi, Good suggestion on the seperate col for state and office. It means slightly less work for me in converting the data into the page. I've taken the dates of office from the individual WP bio pages/List of leader pages, so if you are sure of the date changes that you have made, could you update the relevant bio pages also? Also, take a look at the entry in the list for Denis_Sassou-Nguesso Republic of the Congo, there seems to be a conflict in your chanages between 1996 and 1997.--Rye1967 21:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

User talk spamming[edit]

Please stop spamming user pages with the same message. If you would like an opinion on a dispute see resolving disputes. Thanks.--Andeh 10:10, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Spamming users talk pages is not the correct way to request an opinion/comment, please stop.--Andeh 10:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Who has complained against my comportement? Who did I harm? Švitrigaila 10:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Spamming is frowned apon in wikipedia because a) people don't like to get spam on their talk pages and b) it can introduce bias. You could start a rfc on the issue or discuss the matter in a public place such as the village pump. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 10:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The discussion already exists on Talk:İlham Əliyev. I see no reason to start it again on a page that nobody will read. But if you want, you can read the message I send. I just say : 1) I have a discussion somewhere about one subject, 2) Here is my position on this subject, 3) If you are interested, you can go on this page and vote. I don't force anybody. And you can't say everybody voting in the discussion the same way as I do has an invalid vote. PS: I don't know what a rfc is. Švitrigaila 10:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
I already read the message! You are spamming native turkish speakers, that introduces bias. This is an english speaking encylopedia. Please don't do it anymore. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 10:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
"English Wikipedia" means "Wikipedia in English". It doesn't mean "Wikipedia for the English only". Here, even a Turk has a right to vote. Švitrigaila 11:09, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Of course! But you don't have a right to spam them. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 11:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
And you have no right to erase my private messages to other Users. You don't have to decide what I have the right to say to people I want to speak with. Who do you think you are? Švitrigaila 11:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry i forgot to ad see WP:RFC for how you can get a wider audience involved. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 10:44, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

About WP:RFC, I already tried in the past about another discussion I had. It was about renaming Pope Stephen X into Pope Stephen IX and so on. I tried everything, in vain. Every time I launched the discussion somewhere, there was always one user answering, always the same one, and who voted against my opinion. This discussion seemed to interest absolutely nobody, and I was unable to change a wrong information for a good one because of one user. Of course I tried RFC [1] without any success. Finally, after nearly three mounths of feud, I wrote a message for several persons. I selected exactly the persons I wanted to send the message, considering their past votes. And in only one day, they voted overwhelmingly for my own opinion, and several thanked me for having bring the problem to them.
So, when now you tell me that I'd better use WP:RFC, that's make me laugh! Do you really think anybody read this page sometimes? Even I, who spend a lot of time on Wikipedia and who watch this page, never read it.
Well in that case take it to the village pump Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 11:44, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
A last thing about "spam": Every time someone launch a new portail or a new project, he sends spam to every potentially interested user, and no-one complains. So why couldn't I do that? I sign and date all my posts, and if anyone has something to complain about my comportement, he can tell me himself. Švitrigaila 11:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

You are spamming only a certain subset of wikipedians. You sre interested only in winning your side of the argument. |You started spammimg after the argument was not going your way. You are spamming newbies. I can't make it any clearer. Please stop. I am in the process of rolling back all your spam edits, please don't add amy more. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 11:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, as one of the receivers of the message, I don't consider it "spam" and I'm glad to be informed about an issue of interest to me. Please see [2]. Atilim Gunes Baydin 17:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


Merci pour l'URL. J'ai pensé que c'était une acte de responsibilité et pas spam. J'ai presenté mes opinions. Au revoir. Kedi the tramp 11:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Merci aussi (je ne sais plus comment on dit "merci" en turc, mais je sais que je le savais... c'était peut-être "teşekkũr", mais je ne veux pas dire de bêtises). Ton soutien me fait beaucoup de bien aujourd'hui... Švitrigaila 11:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


Regarding your vote at this article's discussion, please recheck that what you have heard is really "english". Hacek is listed at Merriam-Webster English dictionary [3], however caron isn't [4]. The same is true for the Oxford English Dictionary. From this viewpoint, hacek is a more legitimate english word than "caron", which is probably an Adobe/IT neologism and its -on ending is greek in origin, not english. You might have heard it more often because it is used in the IT/computer/typesetting industry, particularly by Unicode, but it should be noted that non-computer sources use hacek almost exclusively. Moreover, your argument that it also exists in other languages than english is outweighted by the fact, that it was invented by the czech reformer Jan Hus and first used in the Czech language. That's why pre-1980 sources and most contemporary dictionaries adopted hacek from czech into english and not for instance makcen from slovak. If you applied the rules you apply to hacek to the french Resumé, you would probably endup replacing it by some truly "english", newly coined word. 12:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your vote, thanks for preferring caron to háček. Evertype 13:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I thank you for your thanks. :o) I am myself in a feud on another subject. I can't speak with you about it, because User:Theresa knott has decided I have no right to do so. She has sistematically erased all the mails I wrote to other users about the subject. She seems she has the right to decide who I can speak with and what about I can. So I can't speak about it, but if you want, you can find it here. Švitrigaila 13:25, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Ilham Aliyev[edit]

By the way, what was the purpose of your edits to Ilham Aliyev after the page move? What does that accomplish?—Nat Krause(Talk!) 17:16, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

J'ai reçu ton message Švitrigaila. Tot ou tard, le titre sera corrige de toute façon, incongru qu'il est en ce moment. Il faut juste attendre que Monsieur le President voit l'article qui lui est consacre ici et le debat autour de son nom:) Je serais dans le coin. Merci. Cretanforever

I received your message Švitrigaila. Early or late, the title will be corrects in any event, incongruous that it is in this moment. It should just be waited until Mr. President sees the article who him east devotes here and the debate around his name:) I would be in the corner. Thank you. Cretanforever
Translated automatically. Please don't use non-english languages in your messages on english wikipedia. I have put your page into my watch, should you delete anything I will report you. 23:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Better and better! People has the right to send me messages in the tongue they want. If someone wants to post a message on my talk page in Klingon language, he can. Now, I musst admit I haven't understood the end of your message, and I even don't understand if it is a positive or negative comment. My English is not good, you know. Švitrigaila 23:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi I've just seen your message, but unfortunately it is too late I guess, tell me if I can do anything about this issue.--Hattusili 17:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. It seems it's to late, indeed. By a majority, the voters decided to rename İlham Əliyev into Ilham Aliyev. It was done here. But the same day, someone has decided to rename it into İlham Aliyev without any vote (see here)! So, what was the puropose of voting? What a nonsense! And every pages with a "ə" have been renamed with a "a" instead, without any vote, for example, Artur Rasizadə has been renamed Artur Rasizada... There is nothing I can do for the moment. I will go to holydays soon and will be far from internet for several weeks. The better thing we can do, I think, is to launch a more global discussion about the spelling of Azerbaijani names in general, for example on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Azeri. About the fact that the mail I sent you was censored, I don't know what to do at all... Švitrigaila 21:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Salut, Švitrigaila! I've read your message on my talk page concerning the correct spelling of the name of the Azeri president, although it has quickly been deleted by someone else. I tried to look at the discussion pages, but, those discussions have unfortunately gone faaaar beyond the limits of legibility, and I felt I have no contributions to make.. I could only say that, Azeri names and the language used in Azerbaycan could not be a point of expertise for Turkish speakers, since we do not speak and write in the actual same language with that nation. Media and politicians here in Turkey also spell the name of İlham Aliyev as they like it, with Latin alphabet, and read according to Turkish pronunciation rules. For ordinary people, on the other hand, Azeri language is... ehm, for most of the cases... considered to be... a funny think actually :(( I am sure you navigated through the whole web, but I think we should keep in mind that, selon le site officiel du président, écrire son nom en Anglais avec le lettre 'A' ne fait pas de problème.. Anyway, I appreciate your efforts, bon succès! (and my apologies for this weak usage of French) Okan 13:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Heydar Aliyev[edit]

Looking at the history of Heydar Aliyev, it seems to me that this is the third time I've noticed you (apparently deliberately) making edits to a redirect page to prevent other editors from moving a page there. Doing this is very, very bad form and will end up getting you in trouble if you keep doing it.—Nat Krause(Talk!) 17:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course I did. Since a discussion was going on Wikipedia:Requested_moves and since some users tried to change the article's name before the end of the vote, I find this way very practical in order that only an administrator can change the article's name after the end of the vote. Any objection? Švitrigaila 10:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I think it's bad form to force the issue. An admin can place a move-block on the page if there is a serious problem. In any event, there was certainly no requested move in progress on Heydar Aliyev when you did that.—Nat Krause(Talk!) 22:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
I did it for several Azerbaijani pages when a user, allways the same one (Baku87), tried to rename all those pages while there was a discution going on İlham Əliyev's page name. And you can see at Talk:Heydar_Aliyev#Spelling that there was a discussion, redirecting to İlham Əliyev's talk page. Švitrigaila 10:53, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Please refer to this ruling of the arbitration committeeNat Krause(Talk!) 05:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
I can't see the rapport with Baku87. He's not mentioned on this page. Švitrigaila 14:45, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Safari fonts[edit]

Hi Thank you for your notice. My Safari gives just a box for "Ə" in the page though it appears correct in the address bar for example. May be I am missing some fonts. Any tips? --þħɥʂıɕıʄʈʝɘɖı 17:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't have any tip now (and I'm not at home...) Maybe we could compare our respective configurations, but I don't know where to look to begin. Švitrigaila 10:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Nevis PM[edit]

No worries, as you can see I am still obsessed with that page, and with WP, but I will get over it eventually, hopefully I get a new job to take up my time.--Rye1967 03:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Romanization of Russian[edit]

Please don't edit-war over major changes to articles when other editors disagree with you. The previous version of the table had the support of editors' consensus, since it has been stable for a long time. What you are proposing is a major change, so please describe and justify it on the talk page. Michael Z. 2006-11-01 16:55 Z

Basque Portal?[edit]

Kaixo, I'm contacting you because you figure in Category:User eu, meaning that you speak some Basque. You must therefore be Basque yourself or have an intense connection with the Basque Country.

I am thinking that maybe was a good idea to create a Portal (or maybe a Wikiproject? or both?) on the Basque theme but I feel such kind of project requires more than just one person.

If you are interested, please comment in my talk page.

Enjoy, --Sugaar 10:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


More names to be corrected... Thanks for your help! —Nightstallion (?) 22:13, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

My suggestion[edit]

Maybe it would help if you drafted Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Turkmenistan-related articles), Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Vietnam-related articles) and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Azerbaijan-related articles...? Just an idea. —Nightstallion (?) 14:03, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Edit count[edit]

The site to count edits is located here. It gives a detailed list of everything you've done on Wikipedia. Kaiser matias 23:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Question sur TV[edit]

Bonjour, en réponse à votre question sur Tigre volant : oui je suis bien le même utilisateur. J'ai cessé de m'occuper de la version française du texte en raison du fait que le débat sur cet article a viré au grotesque. Les commentaires des utilisateurs Arnaudus et Peps se limitaient au règlement de compte personnel et à l'empoignade plutôt qu'à la discussion de fond; ces deux utilisateurs ayant d'ailleurs écrit qu'ils ne connaissaient pas le sujet et même, qu'ils ne s'y intéressaient pas (!!!!)

Alors tant qu'à perdre mon temps dans une occupation bénévole et anonyme, aussi bien le faire du côté anglophone où les discussions sont intéressantes et bien argumentées et la majorité des utilisateurs ont lu autre chose que le Petit Robert. Pour ce qui est de l'argumentation sur votre proposition, je vous répondrai sur la page de l'article. --Flying tiger 20:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


We may actually succeed this time... Be sure to give me a heads-up if you file RM for any other incorrect names. —Nightstallion (?) 15:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't know what an "RM" is. ... And to be frank, I don't know what "to give a heads-up" means too. :o| Švitrigaila 14:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
RM = requested move, "give a heads-up" = tell me about it. Incidentally, is Serzh Sargsyan correctly transliterated or not? Best to correct it now before everyone becomes aware of the fact that he'll be the new PM and then the new president... —Nightstallion (?) 21:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Technically, yes, he's Սերժ Սարգսյան, that is Serzh Sargsyan if you translitterate it from the Armenian spelling. But his first name is the French first name Serge translitterated in Armenian. The Armenian form of this first name is Սարգիս Sargis. Thus his name means Sergius, (son) of Sergius. Sargsyan is the most common name in Armenia, and Armenian names are very not various. Švitrigaila 21:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Islam Karimov[edit]

I saw De Wikiman changed his name back to Islam. I do not understand how you see his Russian name as Islam and his Uzbek name as Islom. Neither Islam nor Islom are Russian or Uzbek. They are transliterations of how his name is pronounced. Google and Yahoo get way more results with Islam than with Islom. KazakhPol 16:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Uzbek is a cyrillic language and was officially recognized as such until the '90s. His name is Islam because he is nominally a Muslim. "Islom" doesnt mean anything. KazakhPol 19:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Please, see my answer here. Švitrigaila 19:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Requesting a comment[edit]

Could you state your opinion at Talk:French_legislative_election,_2007#Article_title? Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) 16:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. Unenthusiastically but done. Švitrigaila 20:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! (FYI, I was not simply trying to gather support for my opinion, but simply asking opinions of people who I thought would be interested in either elections or semantics of article titles; you needn't "feel bad" or anything like that about disagreeing with me, if that should be the case.) —Nightstallion (?) 14:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


I put in a request for semi-protection because I noticed you and an IP are having an edit war. --Jon Ace 15:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Skanderbeg II[edit]

Hi! This is almost occult: I asked the same question about Skanderbeg II as you - only I asked it on the Skanderbeg page! I haven't found anything on Yahoo or Google. Really peculiar name by the way: Alexander is read as al-Exander in Arabic, which becomes Iskandar due to Arabic not having x or e. The Turks adopted this version, and the Albanians and Slavs got it from them, interpreting the name as i-Skandar, the i being the usual Turk vowel added before double consonants (like Istanbul for Stamboul) and therefore not part of the name. So Skandar or Skender, for Turk language has e. So when the Albanian national hero names himself after Alexander, his name becomes distorted to Skander. Only that Alexander was actually named after his uncle Alexander, king of Epiros in Albania - there's a full circle for you!

Take care Sponsianus 22:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your precisions. I must add that the "-beg" ending is a Turkish title, corresponding to "Bey". It's quite common today in countries influenced by Turkish culture to add such "titles" after first names. For exemple, the president of the Republic of Kazakhstan is named Nursultan Nazarbayev, which means "Sultan Noor, (descendant) of Bey Nazar". Thoses "titles" are just a part of first names and they're no longer genuine titles.
In Albanian, Skanderbeg's name is usually written "Skënderbeu". The reason is: in Albanian language, nouns are either "definite" or "undefinite" with a different ending. Thus "beg" = "a bey" and "beu = the bey". The definite ending is generally a vowel (except sometimes after a "a", it's a "j"). And proper names are definite. It explains why every Albanian surnames end with either a vowel or a "-aj" ending. First names are not concerned if they are used with the surname, but they are if they are used alone. Švitrigaila 10:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
PS: It explains too why in Kosovo some people have a name ending with "-iqi". It's the Serbian ending "-ić" with an definite ending "-i". The Albanian sound of "q" corresponds roughly to the Serbian sound "ć". Švitrigaila 10:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Yashar Aliyev[edit]

It's more about the tradition and the government policy than what seems to be common sense. If you check sources like which is the largest English-language periodical in Azerbaijan, you'd see that all names are transliterated. If you look in a foreign ("travelling") passport of anybody from Azerbaijan, you'd also see that the names are given in two versions: Azeri and transliterated English, i.e. Name: Cəmşid / Jamshid; Surname: Qardaşxanov / Gardashkhanov. Ç becomes CH, Ş becomes SH, X becomes KH, and Q becomes G; i.e. only letters that are not pronounced more or less the same in English are changed. The rest remains the same. I repeat, this is encountered in documents issued by the government of Azerbaijan and is practiced by most of the English-language media of that country. Here on Wikipedia we, editors of Azerbaijan-related pages, seem to be in a consensus when it comes to spelling Azerbaijani names (see vote on Yashar Aliyev talkpage) and adhere to this rule for all names. That's why that vote was initiated in the first place, and that's why I still refuse to concur with the final decision, because those who voted had no idea of this practice and of what my argumentation was based on. Especially because spelling the name as Yaşar Aliyev doesn't make sense: only have of the original spelling is preserved. Parishan 10:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

EU in lists, Kosovan/Kosovo as an adjective[edit]

Hi! DSuser is on a crusade to eliminate the European Union from all lists of countries, namely:

List of countries and outlying territories by total area, Template:AreaChartOver1.5m, List of countries by population, Template:PopulationChartOver500m, Template:PopulationChart50m-500m, List of countries and federations by military expenditures, List of countries by GDP (nominal), List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita, List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita, List of countries by population density, List of countries by English-speaking population, List of countries by exports, List of countries by rail transport network size

It would be of help if you could join the discussion.

Furthermore, there's discussion at Template talk:Serbian local elections on whether we should be using "Kosovo" or "Kosovan" as an adjective (i.e. Kosovo general election vs. Kosovan general election). Your opinion would be welcome there, too. Thanks! —Nightstallion 14:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Nightstallion,
About the adjective about Kosovo, I must say that I have no opinion at all. My English is not correct enough to decide it. And I suppose that if Kosovo gains its independance, it'll change names (for example Kosova, or Dardania, or whatever else). Maybe it will time then to discuss it then. I'm not against Kosovan but I don't think I've already seen it before very often. I may mistake. In French, we use Kosovar, wich is in fact the Albanian name of its inhabitants.
About the inclusion/exclusion of the European Union in those articles, there are pros and cons. On one hand the figures and facts concerning the European Union as a whole are intersting in those lists that are based on comparison between different countries. On the other hand, European Union is not a country and mustn't be presented in the lists as a country. I'm allways displeased when, for example, I hear or I read that California is the 6th world economic power, because it makes no sense since California is not a country but a part of the USA. So I would say that the European Union can appear in the lists, but clearly presented as something else than a country. For example by using a different typography, by not numbering it if the list is numbered and by clearly stating before the list that the European Union has been added for comparison.
One last thing: I can see you've tried to move Hirohito to Emperor Shōwa. You know how much I approve of this move. But the fact you did it just when you ask for my opinion about those questions makes me wonder if it's not just in order to please me. I hope it's not, for you're a serious administrator. I'll try to relaunch the discussion in order to make this issue progressing.
Regards, Švitrigaila 23:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
There was no relation between those two actions at all; thanks for commenting on this. —Nightstallion 20:16, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

There's a central discussion at Talk:European Union/inclusion in lists of countries now. Please state your opinion; thanks! —Nightstallion 09:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you want to comment here again to refresh the arguments for the EU entries in lists? : [5], [6], [7] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lear 21 (talkcontribs) 03:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

David Trézéguet[edit]

Whatever you did/are doing, stop. His name features the accent, look on every single other article in other lanuages on him, including fr:David Trézéguet. - The Daddy 05:14, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Every other single article in other languages on him are based on the English article and reproduce the same mistake. I asked for the French article to be renamed too. My proposition met no opposition up to now. I'm French and I can clearly see that his name is always spelled without accents here. Read that before all and add your own remarks if you want to. Švitrigaila 12:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Armenian transliteration[edit]

Please see ISO 9985. If you want to use another convention, please identify it and let us know on Talk:Armenia. dab (𒁳) 13:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your remark. Note that this article (in its present form) has nothing to do with my renamings. Neither the "Robert Kocharian" form, nor the "Robert Kotcharian" form, nor the "Robert Kocharyan" form are predicted by one of the proposed systems. Švitrigaila 13:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
you should distinguish transliterations and anglicizations. "Kocharyan" is an anglicization. The corresponding transliteration would be K’očaryan. --dab (𒁳) 13:44, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Of course it is. Who speaks about a transliteration? It's exactly why I say ISO 9985 has nothing to do with my renamings. I'm writing a new article called Wikipedia:Romanization of Armenian, using the same model as Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian. When it's ready, everyone will have the possibility to modify it or to add any suggestion. I hope it will be a good working base for any further discussion. Švitrigaila 13:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I was referring to this edit of yours. Your "renamings" are fine. --dab (𒁳) 14:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I sometimes use the word "transliteration" instead of "transcription", it's true. But I don't really mistake the two means. But I don't know why you want to use a transliteration in Armenia article's box (that should be Mek Azg, Mek Mšakowyt and not Mek Azg, Mek Mshakowyt) and a transcription everywhere else. Furthermore, the ւ letter doesn't exist anymore in Eastern Armenian alphabet and is replaced by ու which stand as a letter by itself. There is no good reason to transcribe ու by "ow" instead of "u". And as single letter, "ու" must be transliterated by "u". Švitrigaila 14:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Talk to be continued here

Romanization of Armenian[edit]

But why add this? Armenian is not written in Cyrillics, and the only common grounds the articles have is that they are both about romanization; a fact which is well-addressed by including both articles into Category:Wikipedia naming conventions. Why should a person interested in romanization of Russian also be interested in romanization of Armenian (or vice versa)? Such assumed interest is exactly what is implied by inclusion of links into the "See also" section. Am I missing something? Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Erase it if you want, that's not a problem. Once the table is finished, I'll think exactly where to put links to it. Švitrigaila 17:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I will. I was not sure if you had something in mind or just put a link it on a whim. No problem either way. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
The only thing I have in mind now is to finish the table and explain exactly what it means for me: a guideline for Wikipedia as Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian is for Russian. But it has already been modified and moved by other users who prefer other kinds of transcriptions. Once it's finished, I'll try to explain it better. Švitrigaila 18:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Hirohito article[edit]

Wikipedia policy is to use the most common english name. Mr. Clown moved the article against policy, and I have moved it back. The link updates you've been doing need to be undone. (I can't because I'm travelling and the dial up I am using is too slow) Raul654 (talk) 14:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I reverted the move back to Emperor Shōwa. Seven users have express their opinion on the talk page and the seven favor the move. If you want to revert the title to Hirohito, just prepare a proper vote and we will vote. Wikipedia's policy must be consistency. If every Japanese Emperor is named by his posthumous name, there is no reason this one should not. The principle of the most common English name can apply only were there is no other way to discriminate between to equivalent names. That's why the article about Elvis Presley is neither titled Elvis, nor The King. Švitrigaila (talk) 14:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia's policy must be consistency. - No, it's not. That might be what you want it to be, but the actual naming convention says use the most common name. The specific page for Japanese naming conventions says point blank "For Emperor Hirohito, although he too has been posthumously named Emperor Shōwa, it is also acceptable to refer to him as Emperor Hirohito, or just Hirohito, as that is the name by which he continues to be most widely known in the West. " Raul654 (talk) 15:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

This Manual of Style, in its present form, just states that it is possible to call him "Hirohito", not that "Hirohito" is the good name and "Emperor Shōwa" the wrong name. I've already asked in the past to change this Manual of Style because of its imprecision. You can read this here. The conclusion given to me by other users was that they do not object if Hirohito's page name is changed first. So you can't lean on the Manual of Style for this matter. Švitrigaila (talk) 15:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh yes he can, because it's based, frankly, on the common sense notion of actual usage in English rather than the tortured interpretation you're attempting to put on it. --Calton | Talk 15:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you elaborate? Before calling my point of view a "tortured interpretation", have you any argument? Švitrigaila (talk) 15:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but what part of "actual usage" is giving you trouble? The word "actual"? The word "usage"? Oh, and the tired tactic of pretending someone hasn't actually explained things to you so you can claim no argument was made? No very good. --Calton | Talk 15:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I was not asking for the meaning of "actual usage" but for "tortured interpretation". Švitrigaila (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Bearian (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC) P.S. Sorry about the standard template warning, but I feel it was necessary to give you a quick heads up that your actions at Hirohito could possibly end up in a block for you. So don't get mad at me. Bearian (talk) 16:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps I can help. This problem occurs all over Wikipedia and I've been involved in such debates more times than I can remember. The fact is that this is an English language encyclopedia, so where there's a common usage of a name in English that differs from that used in the native language (even by the subject themselves) it makes 100% sense to use that for the article, with a redirect from the foreign language name. So, our article is at Cologne not Köln, Rome not Roma, Avram Grant not Avraham Grant, Jerusalem not Yerushalayim and, most recently, Muttiah Muralitharan rather than (as he apparently calls himself) Muttiah Muralidharan etc etc. I know this seems unscholarly, but it is user-friendly and consistent. If that's not convinced you, I'll add that with languages like Japanese where names are (obviously) transliterated, there can be irritating variations in spelling, so usage of a widely recognised standardised version helps with that too. Ho hum. Hope that helps. Cheers, --Dweller (talk) 17:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not the same thing. Cologne, Rome and so on are really the English names of those towns. I agree these names must be employed on English Wikipedia. But that's not the same thing with Emperor Shōwa. "Hirohito" is on no account the "English name" of this emperor. The only translation possible for Shōwa Tennō is "Emperor Shōwa". "Hirohito" is just his first name, like "George" is George W. Bush's first name or "Nicolas" is Nicolas Sarkozy's first name. You won't call politely a Japanese person by his first name — and an Emperor furthermore! The so called "custom" to use his first name instead of his regnal name is a bad habit inherited from the custom to name European monarchs (look at this to see an extreme example of where it can lead!) It's a kind of eurocentrism to use a Western custom in this case.
Curiously, every other article about dead Japanese Emperors is titled with their regnal name. Even the article about his spouse, Empress Kōjun, is titled in accord with the regnal name she received after her death in 2000. Of course, the official English web-site of the Imperial household call him Emperor Showa. The official "English" web-site of the Japanese government uses "Emperor Showa" (see here and here). Every institutional or diplomatic document speaking about him call him "Emperor Showa" (or "Shōwa"). Never "Hirohito".
We have here a clash between two conceptions of what an encyclopedia must be. Must it favour facts or customs? For myself it's absolutely obvious that an encyclopedia must always chose facts upon customs. If we stick to customs, then we should still write that Pluto is a planet, at least as long as the public has not changed its mind about it. Švitrigaila (talk) 13:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I understand that one does not call that person as Shōwa until he's dead. So, technically, you are correct, Hirohito is now called by another name. I am something of a fan of Japanese culture, and have added to several such articles. But I believe that WP should go, when possible, by custom in naming conventions. Bearian (talk) 13:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


An RFC on content you have commented on has opened, comments are welcome. MBisanz talk 01:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


You might be interested in the discussion at Talk:Zoran Žigić. —Nightstallion 18:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


I wonder if you would perhaps explain to me why we should prefer "Islom Karimov" when "Islam Karimov" is not only much more widely used in Western news sources, but it is also the form used by the Uzbek government itself in its English language publications? john k (talk) 06:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Tajik language[edit]


Sorry for the late reply. Thanks for getting to me about the Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic. I have added the missing word from the lyrics, which I believe to be фаро (faro), because the verb фаро расид (faro rasid) in that line translates from Tajik as reached, i.e. that whole line should translate as the voice of Lenin reached [us]. I have also corrected the transliterated version; the word fara that was added by an anonymous user is probably the farsi version. Regarding the correct punctuation, I couldn't find any sources with the lyrics of the anthem either; most of the ones I found link to this Wikipedia article. But I believe there should be something somewhere on the Internet, so I will keep looking :-)

Thanks again for getting to me about this issue. Let me know if you have any other concerns about this particular article or other Tajikistan-related articles.

 ARTYOM  15:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Referendum of September, 28th, 1958 in French colonies[edit]

Hello, Švitrigaila! I request to you, as to French. Do you can to help me with information about Constitutional referendum on September, 28th, 1958 in French colonies what retain colonies now (under different shields as well as overseas department or overseas collectivity) namely: Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana, Reunion, New Caledonia, French Polynesia; also: Comoros (including Mayotte), Saint-Martin (within Guadeloupe), Saint-Barthelemy (within Guadeloupe), Wallis and Futuna (within New Caledonia)?

1) I interested in (for each colony):

A) How many voters took place in referendum (and how many in per cents); B) How many people voted for New Constitution (and how many in per cents); C) How many people voted against New Constitution (and how many in per cents); D) How voted inhabitants of later created territories (as a result of secession from largest colonies)?

2) Could overseas departments (French Guiana, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Reunion) to secede from French Colonial Empire and became an independent countries according to conditions of referendum if them rejected proposal draft Constitution, as well as Republic of Guinea done it?

If you know Russian, you can to answer on Russian.CrazyRepublican (talk) 07:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Romania[edit]

Flag map of Romania.svg
Hi! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in contributing to WikiProject Romania. It is a project aimed at organizing and improving the quality and accuracy of articles related to Romania. Thanks and best regards!

--Codrin.B (talk) 06:02, 21 January 2012 (UTC)