View source for Talk:Czech Republic/Archive 1

{{Aan}}

== Requested move==
{{polltop}}
:''It was [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested]] that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved.'' From [[Czech Republic]] to [[Czechia]], counting 4 support votes to 9 oppose. [[User:Hajor|&ndash;Hajor]] 03:01, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 

===Support===
# '''Support''' moving this country's article to the correct name Czechia.   ''—[[User:Mzajac |Michael]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Mzajac |Z.]]&nbsp;<small>2005-09-26&nbsp;17:49&nbsp;Z</small>''
# Strongly '''support''' the move to Czechia. [[User:Nightstallion|&mdash;]] [[Image:Flag of Austria.svg|15px]] [[User:Nightstallion|ナイトスタリオン]] <sub>[[User_talk:Nightstallion|ㇳ–ㇰ]]</sub> [[Special:Watchlist|&mdash;]] 18:15, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
# '''In favor.''' The Wikipedia policy indeed recommends to use the most common name but ... Till 1992 Czechia/Czech Republic didn't exist as an independent state, it was a part of a two-country federation of Czechoslovakia and thus there was no need to have a one-word English name for one of its parts. Interestingly, there didn't exist a Czech word either. Simply put, on January 1, 1993 there was a new country and it needed a name. Logical, linguisticly correct Czech name would have been ''Česko'' but a lot of citizens were opposed to it, their only reason being it didn't sound nice to them (someone started that and the crowd followed suit). So they started to use the descriptive form of ''Česká republika'' and forced this to the English speaking world too. If English was left to develop and start using its own name for the country it would definitely be a one-word expression. At the beginning a lot of Czech media were opposed to the short form too but during the years the word Česko caught on, and is becomming more and more common and in a few years time it will hopefully prevail. There are some people who take the fight against ''Česko''/Czechia as their personal ''jihad'' and behave rather as inquisitors. It can be seen even here in Wikipedia - they insult people who dare to use ''Czechia'', vandalize pages by repeated reverts ... To put it in a nutshell the name Czech Republic is used not beacuse the English or Americans chose so but beacause some Czechs forced them to do so, claiming it was the only correct form. Today Wikipedia has such impact that it can (help) make things move and so why not to do it in this case? — [[User:Caroig|Caroig]] 22:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
#:Wikipedia is not a primary source, but a secondary source of information.  That means we look around and see: do travel books use the term "Czechia" (''[[Lonely Planet]]'', etc)?  Do major news media use the term "Czechia" (the ''[[Economist]]'', etc)?  Do airlines use it?  Do Czech government institutions even use it?  Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promoting anything, including linguistic change.  The rest of the world has to reflect such a change first, and only then Wikipedia takes note of that change accordingly. -- [[User:Curps|Curps]] 16:52, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
#:I agree with Curps' statement. The name Czechia is found no where on the planet except on the internet. Wikipedia is NOT a propaganda tool and is NOT here to spread new, unaccepted ideas. '''Mike Jirousek'''
#::The Economist uses "Czech Republic" consistently. [[User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] 19:01, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
#'''Favor'''. I have discussed this topic here 100 times already. For lack of time, some remarks at least: The (English) term Czechia is officially prescribed in Czech laws on the terminology of their country (i.e. it is a constantly violated regulation  - but only partially, because the long form is also correct). Secondly, it is  definitely not true that it is not used and it was even used centuries ago. For example, I have recently seen a kind of country logo for Czechia which explicitely contains the short form, there are English encyclopedias that have asked scholars and use the correct form, you will find occurrencies at the UN etc. and the Czech Foreign Ministry has issued a general demand TWO TIMES that it should be used. The first problem with the word is that is refused by the older generation (e.g. Pavel Vozenilek, do not take it personally), because it is used to the long forms "Czech Socialist Republic" (1969-1990) - which was actually prescribed by the Communists- and "Czech Republic" (1990-1992). And an answer to the comments below: It is not used even by many Czech authorities, because (as they will confirm to you if you ask) when they use it, many English speaking people (who like all those below do not know that Czechia is fully correct and "normal") are perplexed and ask whether this is a correct word, thus the authorities resignate and not to use it. The persons responsible for the name of Czech ice hockey players were prompted several times by the authorieties to use Czechia, but they refused to do so saying that the English speaking people do not know the word. As a result  the players have/had no inscription (as far as I remember) - Do you see how ridiculous this is? In other words: the initial error (that Czech Republic is the only correct form) in the English speaking media in the 1990s forces the Czechs themselves to use the wrong form. There was a similar problem with the Czech short form "Česko", but since no uninformed US etc. journalists are involved in this case, the term is now used without any problems. In sum, the article should be moved, because Czechia is correct, officially desired, would help at least to inform people that that it is correct (after all that's what an encyclopedia should do), and above all it is systematic - countries are stated under they geographical name (i.e. Czechia, France, Poland, Slovakia...) - if they exist - in all encyclopedias in the world. In other words, since '''Czech Republic and Czechia have not the same function and are not fully equivalent''' (the former is the long form, the latter the short form and geographical name), the question is not which one is used more frequently, but the question is whether we are able to be systematic and to use the (official, existing, correct) short form for this country article just like for any other articles, despite the fact that 80% of the English speaking world are misinformed and do not use it. A good encyclopedia should do so. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 03:40, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
#:If the Czech government and Czech organizations really want foreigners to start using "Czechia", they need to set a good example and ''start using it themselves''!  If the Czech Foreign Ministry has issued a general demand, why does it not change the contents of its own copyright website at http://www.czech.cz/ ? You say that many Czechs themselves refuse to use "Czechia"... how can you demand that foreigners do something that Czechs themselves refuse to do?  Believe me, when I see a Czechia Olympic team and a Czechia football team and a Czechia ice hockey team, announced with that name on television, I will vote for this change in a heartbeat.  Just do it.  Until then, no.  I would like to respect Czech people's wishes, but it seems there is no unanimity at all among Czechs about what they themselves want.  Many of them simply do not seem to want what you claim they want. -- [[User:Curps|Curps]] 04:14, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
##:This is a kind of vicious circle, Czech authorities say they cannot use it, because the English speaking people do not know the word, and the English speaking people say the Czechs have to start to use it then they will too. In countries like Germany and other countries where the language is regulated (including Czechia) this problem has been solved by the language authorities saying in dictionaries: use Tschechien etc. and people use it. Since English is not regulated it is a language that basically works as a propagator of frequent language errors of its speakers (authors of dictionaries only repeat words they see in reality). This is a very good example where such a system has its limits. The wikipedia would be a good starting point for breaching this vicious circle...And independently of this, it still holds that Czech Republic is not fully equivalent to Czechia, just like the French Republic is not equivalent to France etc.[[User:Juro|Juro]] 01:50, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
##::What about the [[Dominican Republic]]?  It has no "short form" in English, or Spanish, or apparently Czech (''Dominikánská republika'').  And no one considers this a problem.  Look, even a widely-disliked dictatorial regime managed to get the world to switch from using "Burma" to "Myanmar" (despite democratic opposition groups who oppose the name switch).  And India got the world to switch from "Bombay" to "Mumbai". So if the Czech government and people insisted on "Czechia", the world would switch within a few years.  But it seems many Czechs don't even want this... maybe even a majority.  Your "good starting point" would be the websites operated by the Czech government, not this website. -- [[User:Curps|Curps]] 04:17, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
##:::[[Dominican Republic]] and [[Dominica]] are two different nations, the use of the former can be justified as a way to differentiate it from the latter. Compare also with two "[[Congo|Congo's]]". The situation with Czechia is that in Czech media, ''Česko'' is now at least as common as ''Česká republika'', but you are right that neither Czech government nor the people care about what name is used abroad and stick to what they're used to.
# '''Support''' I personally think Czechia is the best choice. But why not compromise on the matter, for the title put: Czechia then(Czech Republic) in the brackets or vice-versa until all users are comfortable with it.  Its about time the English speaking world sucks it up and starts using the correct term. [[User:Basser g|Basser g]] 20:19, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

===Oppose===
# The name "Czechia" is not normally used in English.  That there is no good reason for this does not change anything.  [[User:John Kenney|john]] [[User_talk:John Kenney|k]] 19:24, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
# '''Oppose'''. Google speaks clearly: 681,000 (Czechia, [http://www.google.com/search?as_q=Czechia&num=10&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=lang_en&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&safe=images]) against 119,000,000 ("Czech Republic", [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&q=%22Czech+Republic%22&btnG=Search&lr=lang_en]). To make it more evident, it is 1:170. According to [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names)]], the article should stay where it is, as its current title is ''far'' more used than the proposed. -- [[User:Sandius|Sandius]] 19:37, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. Wikipedia convention is to use the most common name, which is undoubtedly ''Czech Republic''. --[[User:Zundark|Zundark]] 08:45, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. If you don't like Wikipedia policy on common names, try to change it, rather than ignoring it completely. [[User:Proteus|Proteus]] [[User_talk:Proteus|(Talk)]] 13:56, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''.  It's certainly not the common name;  it's not even clear it's the '''official'' name.  (Or they have a set of "official names", or something like that, in which case it's not the "official full name".)  Isn't it simply a "preferred reference"?  If it's a preference a reasonable proportion of English-speaking media start reflecting, then we should move it, but not before.  (Current official policy would possibly even imply a ''majority'', but it's not like it's easy to measure that incontrovertibly, and I'm not sure it's even desirable.)  Further see, http://www.czech.cz, "Official Site for the Czech Republic".  [[User:Alai|Alai]] 21:57, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
##Regarding "it's not the official full name": That argument doesn't hold. The official full name of my country in English is "Republic of Austria", not "Austria". The article is still at the "official short name" location. [[User:Nightstallion|&mdash;]] [[Image:Flag of Austria.svg|15px]] [[User:Nightstallion|ナイトスタリオン]] <sub>[[User_talk:Nightstallion|ㇳ–ㇰ]]</sub> [[Special:Watchlist|&mdash;]] 14:03, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. I also do not think Czechia is a commonly used term. Pesonally, I have never heard anyone in the English-speaking world using Czechia when referring to this country. [[User:Adam J. Sporka|Adam J. Sporka]] 12:12, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''', because it is far from clear that even the Czech government or people wish to make this change.  Take a look at [http://www.czechcentrum.cz/], in which the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself uses "Czech Republic" and "CR", and note that's a site intended for the general public (ie, informal usage, not formal diplomatic usage).  Radio Prague also uses "Czech Republic" [http://www.radio.cz/en/].  The official government website vlada.cz uses "Czech Republic" and "CR" [http://wtd.vlada.cz/eng/aktuality.htm] [http://wtd.vlada.cz/scripts/detail.php?id=8600].  If the Czechs really and truly wished to make this change, one simple way to do so would be to have national sports teams compete under the name "Czechia" (football matches, ice hockey tournaments, Olympic teams).  The world would quickly take notice.  However, they haven't done so. -- [[User:Curps|Curps]] 17:53, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. I have never seen this word in any serious journal or newspaper. I have seen the "Czechia" exactly once on some website. People actually use very incorrect word "Czech" to name the country more than Czechia. [[User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] 18:59, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. It is not the correct way to indicate the country. --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 19:05, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. I don't understand the point of using a name generally neither understood nor even used by native English speakers - in an English version of an encyclopedia!  Mentioning it in the main body is ok, but to actually rename is a bit extreme. Usage is what is most important, and also current policy reflecting that. [[User:Garethhamilton|Garethhamilton]] 17:59, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''.  "Czechia" has simply not been accepted by the overwhelming majority of the English speaking world, perhaps because it sounds so artificial.  Unless the Czech word "Česko" is accepted internationally, the entry should remain under "Czech Republic".  That is, after all, where the majority of people will look for it! [[User:Skinsmoke|Skinsmoke]] 00:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''.  "Czechia" has simply not been accepted by the overwhelming majority of the English speaking world (sorry for borrowing it) and most of Czechs refuse to call their land "Cesko" or "Czechia". They call it "The Czech Republic". So let them. It's that simple. 05:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
# As a citizen of the Czech Republic, I will say that this whole discussion is very silly. Czechs use the words Cesko almost as a slang phrase or term of endearment, not as an official name for the country. Ceska Republika is the country I was born in, and Cesko is what I love. I do not know why there has to be a correlating English word. I wonder why Americans cannot simply take the time to write Czech Republic. [[User:Alc beverage|Alc beverage]] 21:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

===Comments===
I tried to make my point [[Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_%28common_names%29#Specific_cases|here]]. As I stated there, it's not a matter of "official name" &mdash; official names of countries are not the ones they are usually referred by. [[User:Nightstallion|&mdash;]] [[Image:Flag of Austria.svg|15px]] [[User:Nightstallion|ナイトスタリオン]] <sub>[[User_talk:Nightstallion|ㇳ–ㇰ]]</sub> [[Special:Watchlist|&mdash;]] 22:36, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
:For all those who oppose the move, take a look at [http://www.czechia.org this]. [[User:Nightstallion|&mdash;]] [[Image:Flag of Austria.svg|15px]] [[User:Nightstallion|ナイトスタリオン]] <sub>[[User_talk:Nightstallion|ㇳ–ㇰ]]</sub> [[Special:Watchlist|&mdash;]] 14:09, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
:For all those who support the move, take a look at [http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=%22Czech+republic%22&word2=Czechia this].
{{pollbottom}}
''I wonder why Americans cannot simply take the time to write Czech Republic.'' - Probably for the same reason people all over the world write "America" instead of "The United States of America" =) - [[User:Themightyquill|TheMightyQuill]] 22:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

== Foreign Relations merge ==
I think it would be appropriate to merge the [[Czech Republic/Foreign relations]] and [[Czech Republic/Transnational issues]] into a single article, titled "Foreign relations of the Czech Republic".  I'd leave both subpage links as redirects to the new article.  Would anyone object to such an idea? [[User:-- April|-- April]] 08:33 Aug 28, 2002 (PDT)

: I thought it was agreed to rename all X/Transnational Issues pages to Foreign relations of X, so I'd say nobody will object this. [[User:Jheijmans|Jeronimo]]
----
== The name Czechia ==

Why does Wikipedia not name the article about [[Germany]] "Federal Republic of Germany" and the article about [[France]] "French Republic", while the article about Czechia is named [[Czech Republic]]? Why do you use the official name in this single case?? - Miroslav

:It's not called this because it's the official name, but because it's the name most commonly used in an English-language context - it's a general Wikipedia policy to do this. --[[User:Camembert|Camembert]]

::Despite my edit some weeks ago adding [[Czechia]] to the [[Europe]] page, i support the group of edits that, in the last 24 hours, drastically downgrades the use of the term.  (I'm about to edit one use of it into the new text, which may fix a slight awkwardness.  If i'm being too prissy, i hope someone will revert or improve it.)  --[[User:Jerzy|Jerzy]] 13:51, 2003 Oct 19 (UTC)

:Could it be that Czechia is so rarely used because it is so similar in pronunciation to Chechnya? --[[User:128.176.76.16|128.176.76.16]] 08:11, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

::I doubt it. Consider the case of [[Georgia (country)|Georgia]] and [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], or [[Republic of the Congo|Congo]] and [[Democratic Republic of the Congo|Congo]], or even [[Australia]] and [[Austria]]. There are plenty of similar-sounding geographic names. I think it's because (as far as I know) the name ''Czechia'' has never been used in English before, so it's a strange-sounding word to most people, and the name ''Czech Republic'' was ingrained into people's minds first. To be honest, many people I talk to still refer to ''Czechoslovakia''; even worse, when I tell people I'm studying [[Czech language|Czech]], they ask me, "Oh, you mean Czechoslovakian?", as if the word ''Czech'' is somehow an abbreviation for ''Czechoslovakian'' as ''trig'' is to ''trigonometry''. Sigh. If only we could issue a giant electromagnetic blast or something and burn the words ''Czech'' and ''Czechia'' into everyone's brains. --[[User:Bkell|Bkell]] 08:26, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It remains a real mystery why the name "Czechia" has never caught on among English-speakers, but I agree that it is a fact that it has not and that the name given to this article is, for now at least, the correct one. 

The only reason I can think of is the look of the word itself. While (''pace'' Bkell) few have ever had any problems with the word "Czech", which has seen long employment -- and was also frequently, if erroneously, used to mean Czechoslovak(ian) -- the written form "Czechia" '''looks''' hard to pronounce. Is that "Chek-kia" or is it meant to be "Cheh-hia"? And if you try throwing "Czechia" into your conversation, "to try it out for size", people tend to look at you somewhat pityingly: you are clearly either a little mad ("he's making up his own names for countries now") or so uneducated that you don't know the country is called either (to those who have been asleep for the last dozen years or so) "Czechoslovakia" or (to those who do follow foreign news) "the Czech Republic".

Has there not also been a certain lack of will on the part of the Czechs themselves, however? The people of Belarus have had far more success in persuading the English-speaking world to call their country by a name of their own choosing. Are the Czechs too unassertive to be able to point out now and again that "actually we'd prefer it if you called our country Czechia"? -- [[User:81.133.73.122|81.133.73.122]] 15:08, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Just my 2 cents, but I've always felt that "The Czech Republic" was an awkward construction as articulated in English.  That being said, "Czechia" wouldn't be much better, in the clumsiness department. [[User:Dukeofomnium|Dukeofomnium]] 20:49, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

: I'm surprised no one mentioned this already: I read a few years ago that the reason the Czechs don't use "Cheh-hia" or something similar to that is because that's the name the Germans gave it when it was a rump state in World War II. Too many bad memories over that, understandably, is the reason given. Has anyone heard different? [[User:Krupo|Krupo]] 01:49, Jun 23, 2004 (UTC)

::Thats realy not the reason. First, during German occupation, the land was named "Reichsprotektorat Böhmen und Mähren" (German), which translates to Czech "&#344;í&#353;ský protektorát &#268;echy a Morava". In Czech it was usualy abbreviated "protektorat". Translation to English would be "Reichs protectorate Bohemia and Moravia", but I wonder, how important that was - English speaking countries were Allies, and standard name propably was "occupied Czechoslovakia".
::So there no direct or indirect link to Czechia, and this theorz is completelz wrong.[[User:Wikimol|Wikimol]] 07:43, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

::: What Krupo means is the German word "Tschechei" instead of  the older (and present-day) form "Tschechien". Tschechei was (by coincidence) used during the Nazi period, so that the Czechs do not like it. But this has nothing to do with Czechia, which is the Enhglish equivalent for both Tschechien and Tschechei. The real reason for the use of Czech Republic instead of Czechia is that the Czechs themselves initially used the Czech equivalent of Czech Republic rather than Czechia (reasons: see [[Czech lands]]), so that all translators used Czech Republic in English as well, so that English-speaking people started to think that this is the correct usage. Nowadays many Czechs understand this "error" and use the Czech equivalent of Czechia increasingly, but for the English-speaking world it seems to be too late, although Czech Republic is in fact ridiculous and Czechia is historically and geographically correct, short und clear. [[User:Juro|Juro]]

:::: Thanks for the clarification. To understand how difficult it can be to change, consider people who want the word collision/crash to be used in place of accident in the context of car crashes. It takes a bit of mental re-programming to get used to that, or Czechia for that matter.... :) [[User:Krupo|Krupo]] 20:18, Jun 27, 2004 (UTC)

I guess, ''Czechia'' didn't come to wider usage yet because it was simply not used. The truth is that Czechs didn't know how to call the country when Slovakia left the federation. However, ''Czechia'' is more and more used, I meet more and more people across Europe who use this word. An official name sounds too officialy and is not pleasant for many people. Many Czechs feel, a short name is needed. Wikipedia is a very fast medium and can use this short and correct word among the first ones.
There are several reasons why to use shorter version:
* It is official since 1993 similarly to the long name.
* Althought dictionaries are usually very conservative media, we can found ''Czechia'' even in them: Try [http://www2.dict.cc/ dict.cc (ENG-GER)], [http://www.online-translator.com/text.asp#tr_form Online-translator(ENG-RUS)], [http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/SEARCH_RESULTS.html?y=0&q=Czechia&x=0&ssid=22481405&scope=global&time=0.836086687582444 Oxford Reference] and [http://slovnik.zcu.cz/online/index.php Free ENG-CZ]. Wikipedia also knows [[Czechia]] and this page is used even by some dictionaries, try [http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/ Webster's online dictionary].
* Czech Wikipedia also uses the Czech equivalent ''[[cs:&#268;esko|&#268;esko]]'' as its primary name.
* Similarly [[bg:%D0%A7%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%B8%D1%8F|bg:&#1063;&#1077;&#1093;&#1080;&#1103;]], [[ca:Tx%C3%A8quia|ca:Txèquia]], [[da:Tjekkiet]], [[de:Tschechien]], [[eo:%C4%88e%C4%A5io|eo:&#264;e&#293;io]], [[fi:T%C5%A1ekki|fi:T&#353;ekki]], [[he:%D7%A6%27%D7%9B%D7%99%D7%94|he:&#1510;'&#1499;&#1497;&#1492;]]?, [[ja:%E3%83%81%E3%82%A7%E3%82%B3|ja:&#12481;&#12455;&#12467;]]?, [[nl:Tsjechi%EB|nl:Tsjechië]], [[no:Tsjekkia]], [[pl:Czechy]], [[sv:Tjeckien]], [[uk:%D0%A7%D0%B5%D1%85%D1%96%D1%8F|uk:&#1063;&#1077;&#1093;&#1110;&#1103;]], [[zh:%E6%8D%B7%E5%85%8B%E5%85%B1%E5%92%8C%E5%9B%BD|zh:&#25463;&#20811;&#20849;&#21644;&#22269;]]?.
All these languages are among top languages in Wikipedia and they have a short variant as a primary one. I marked he, ja and zh versions with a question mark because I am not able to decide if this is really a short version. I suppose, yes.
[[User:Miraceti|Miraceti]] 00:43, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

: I fear that many of these names, including the Czech one, are not simple equivalents of "Czechia", as they mean both "Bohemia" and (by extension) the whole Czech state. -- [[User:Naive cynic|Naive cynic]] 01:09, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
::You are not right, it is enough to click on the links to get a proof. I cannot say anything about he, ja and zh due to non-latin alphabet and bg, fi and uk due to a lack of information on their pages (but I will ask my friends) but all other languages distinguish between "Czechia" and "Bohemia". See [[ca:Bohèmia]], [[da:Bøhmen]], [[de:Böhmen]], [[eo:Bohemio]], [[nl:Bohemen]], [[no:Bøhmen]], [[pl:Bohemia]], [[sv:Böhmen]]. [[User:Miraceti|Miraceti]] 09:59, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
::[[fi:Böömi]]
::[[cs:&#268;echy]]
::[[uk:&#1041;&#1086;&#1093;&#1077;&#1084;&#1110;&#1103;]]
::: I said 'many of', not 'all'. ''&#1063;&#1077;&#1093;&#1080;&#1103;'' (Bulgarian, Russian), ''&#1063;&#1077;&#1093;&#1080;&#1112;&#1072;'' (Macedonian), ''&#932;&#963;&#949;&#967;&#943;&#945;'' (Greek), ''&#268;ehija'' (Latvian), ''&#268;ekija'' (Lithuanian), ''&#268;e&#353;ka'' (Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, Slovenian), ''Csehország'' (Hungarian), ''Czechy'' (Polish) - all of them have both meanings. In colloquial, rather than formal usage, it is also often true for Czech and Slovakian ''&#268;echy''. Polish ''Bohemia'', which you refer to, is not a stylistically neutral variant, but rather a poetic one (and it is also the case for Russian ''&#1041;&#1086;&#1075;&#1077;&#1084;&#1080;&#1103;''). It has been, apparently, used on pl: only for a need of disambiguating name.  -- [[User:Naive cynic|Naive cynic]] 18:41, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

::::You are absolutely right, in fact, Bohemia is a traditional name of the country (used until 1918) in English and IMHO should be used again. When Bohemia regained its independence in 1918, it was decided to rename it "Czechoslovakia" to show that it is a country of Czechs (Bohemia) and Slovaks (acquired territories in northern Hungary, now Slovakia). When Slovakia seceded, we should get back to Bohemia instead of creating another strange word after "Czechoslovakia", now "Czechia". (This renaming took place mostly in Romance and Germanic languages, where the traditional "Celtic" name derived from [[Boii|Boi]] tribe remained in use over centuries.) -- [[User:Qertis|Qertis]] 19:55, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

::::: No, the term &#268;esko for the geographical Czech territory exists at least since the middle ages, it was codified in 1777. The English equivalent exists since centuries as well. "&#268;esko" was also used thrghout the existence of Czechoslovakia, although rarely (you can find it in texts referring to 1918, 1968 and for example in the book "Zem&#283;pisná jména &#268;eskoslovenska" [Geographical names of Czechoslovakia] of 1982 written by experts on such things). The term Bohemia always referred only to western Czechia, while the rest was called [[Moravia]] and [[Silesia]]. If the term Bohemia was used for all Czech lands, it was an error stemming from the correct term "Lands of the Bohemian crown". In addition, it was the Czechs themselves who insisted on replacing the terms "Bohemian" (Böhmisch) with Czech in the 19th century (not in the 20th century). (Finally, you should not denote Slovakia as "acquired territory", because that's historically not correct...) [[User:Juro|Juro]] 22:00, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

::::::"&#268;esko" is just a modern form of "&#268;echy" (I have seen some "&#268;esko, Morava a Slezsko" phrases several times) like Rakousy-Rakousko, &#352;pan&#283;ly-&#352;pan&#283;lsko etc. and the factual difference between these two terms is only additional. Bohemia always referred to the realm ruled by the king of Bohemia, which means also present-day [[Moravia]] and [[Silesia]], and not only Bohemia proper. Austria is not only Upper and Lower Austria (Austria proper), Poland is more than just Greater Poland and Bohemia is simply more than Bohemia proper. You are right that "Czechs" and "Bohemians" were distinguished earlier, but "Magyars" and "Hungarians" as well and there is no "Magyaria" on the English map of Europe. In short, there is no reason to fight for Czechia when you have such a nice and time-proven name. (As for Slovakia, it wasn't meant to be rude, there are just some historians promoting this point of view...) -- [[User:Qertis|Qertis]] 01:43, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

:::::::Agreed, name Bohemia has beed used up till 1918 and should be used again. Same apply for towns that Czechs occupied after Benes' decrees after 1948. Moravians are not Czechs, Silesians are not Czechs. Lands under Bohemian Crown was [[Bohemia]], [[Moravia]] and [[Silesia]]. Term "Czech" was never official in the west and for a good reason. Communism and socialism is over lets go back and clean up that Czech mess once and for all. -- [[User:IEEE|IEEE]]

:::::: What you are saying seems to be plausible, but it simply is not true. I have dealt specifically with this topic once. There is a difference between what people were using incorrectly (namely Bohemia as an abreviation for the "Lands of the Bohemian crown") and what the correct term was. (1) Moravia (and of course Silesia) always had a kind of separate administration and status (unlike Slovakia which lost its special status within Hungary in 1108) . If you take any old map you will see Lands of the Bohemian Crown subdivided into Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia (or Teschen, Opole etc.) etc.. Specifically, during Austria-Hungary (ie. before the creation of Czechoslovakia), Bohemia and Moravia were completely separated.  - see e.g. [http://www.euratlas.com/time2.htm] from 1200 onwards (2) The term &#268;esko was used as a general geographical term for the "Czech" (whatever that meant) territory (just like Slovensko for the territory inhabited by Slovaks, although there was no political unit) - the ending -sko has always had this general meaning. (3) Of course, linguistically, &#268;esko is the modern form of &#268;echy, but it is "modern" since the Renaissance and acquired a special meaning soon (which is often the case with alternative names). However &#268;esko was very rare (I know that), because on the one hand the adjective of  &#268;esko and &#268;echy is identical in Czech and on the other hand people simply always specified whether they mean Bohemia / Moravia / Silesia  etc. in the past (4) As for "Magyaria",  you are right,  but the fact that the Magyars did not manage to persuade the world to use the name they desire (they changed Hungaria into "Land of Magyars" in the 1840s in the Hungarian language) is no argument. (5) Most importantly, I know no reputable Czech source (or at least encyclopaedia) that would support your interpretation of the definition of the term "&#268;echy" as referring to all Lands of the Bohemian crown.  [[User:Juro|Juro]] 04:55, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

:::::: I don't know, whether there is any "correct" or "incorrect" name of the country, names are first of all "used" or "unused" and Bohemia is the name employed for describing the Czech state for centuries, while Czechia is a much younger invention. Moravia has been integral part of Bohemia since 11th century (with only short breaks) until today. There was constant pressure from the Empire and Habsburgs to weaken this unity (e.g. Moravian Margravate established by Barbarossa) and it was later somehow successful within ever more centralised Habsburg Empire, that's true. But today's Bohemia/Czechia is a unitary state and to me it is better to use the old, traditional, though a little bit ambiguous term rather than the new, ahistorical and for many people "weird" one. Ad (5) see [http://h-net.org/~habsweb/sourcetexts/masaryk2.htm]. -- [[User:Qertis|Qertis]] 17:16, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

::::::: Well, but you are from Prague, aren't you? Nobody here, in Moravia, treats &#268;echy (Bohemia) as an equivalent to &#268;esko. You can speak about unitary state, which is true, but there still remains a historical and cultural separation between the ''overlording'' Bohemia and Moravia, Silesia and other, now lost, countries of The Lands of Bohemian Crown. With only a little exagaration, Bohemian representations keep trying to incorporate Moravia for more than a millenium. So, non-Czech readers, please pay attention, whether a native partisan of "&#268;esko" or "&#268;echy" comes from Bohemia, Moravia or Silesia. [[User:Bohuslavroztocil|Bob]] 09:27, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

:::::::: Bohemia is the only valid name accepted in the West. The name was established and endured for over thousand years. This NEW     "Czech-whatever" is well, weird. At least for me and people that I know. Bohemia would boost tourism, business, real estate..etc. if once re-established. Even Tomas Masarick used Bohemia in his works. But now it seams to be a little bit too late. Also renaming will never pass due to communism brain washed generation occuping that region now. Look what is user "Juro" is doing. He is deleting other people opinions, just like some crookish communist censor. He knows history from communist historical books and is fighting like mad for his obviously biased truth. --[[User:IEEE|IEEE]] 20:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

:::::: Of course there is a correct, i.e. used as official, name and other names. I can only repeat what I already said above. The example you are giving is a very very bad one - this was only a proposal of 1915 and has nothing to do with the state which then arose in reality, which was called Czechoslovakia as you know (and not "Bohemian state"). And as you can see, it also includes Slovakia as part of the "Bohemian state", which is a non-sense from any point of view. There were proposals for a Russian state, Slovak state, Polish state and Czecho-Slovakia etc. in this area at that time. So this is really a very bad example ...[[User:Juro|Juro]] 19:42, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

:::::: If "Bohemia" (and "Republic of Bohemia") was proclaimed as the new official name of the Czech Republic, than it would become the correct name as you defined it. Ihe example only shows that also such an educated and experienced politician as Masaryk used the name Bohemia for the whole independent state, even including future Slovakia, certainly without any intention of antagonizing Slovaks or Moravians. I don't know who is responsible for the invention of "Czechoslovakia" (as a name), it is obvious, however, that it came only after the proposals of independce (and that it causes headaches to this very day). -- [[User:Qertis|Qertis]] 11:26, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

::::::(1)We can hardly argue using Ifs. . . (2) Actually, you should have learned in history that this (one-time) use of "Bohemian state" had specific political reasons at that time (that is before Czechoslovak troops helped the Entente in the war) - namely to show that Czechoslovakia will not be another Austria-Hungary, i. e. a country with ethnic problems.  (3) Most importantly, however,  it is good that you mention Masaryk,  because this educated person also said on 31 May 1918 (i. e. 2-3 years later): "There will a free "&#268;esko" (Czechia) and a free "Slovensko" (Slovakia)",  which is a good example for the use of Czechia... [[User:Juro|Juro]] 23:49, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 
:::: 1) 'Many of' what? My list comes from the top Wikipedian languages which uses an equivalent of 'Czechia' as a name for the Czechia's article. I wonder, where you take your sureness of the languages you write about because I discuss it with native people as most as I can and it is not easy at all.
:::: 2) BTW: What is the problem, if an equivalent of 'Czechia' is ambiguous in some languages? 'England' or 'Great Britain' are also very ambiguous in many languages and nobody wants to rename it.
::::[[User:Miraceti|Miraceti]] 23:44, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

::::: 1) Corrections are, of course, welcome.
::::: 2) It certainly isn't a problem for me. It was, however, perceived as a problem by Czech government, which was one of the two reasons why did they decide to adopt the name ''Czechia''. -- [[User:Naive cynic|Naive cynic]] 13:01, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)


I just thought of something... If a person from Slovakia was Slovakian, then if suddenly people started using Czechia, it could get confusing. Usually, people say a person from the Czech Republic is Czech. So then if Czechia was used, would the person from there be Czechian? Even though the term Slovak makes sense, there are other countries where it doesn't make sense. Or maybe I'm entirely wrong.

A person from Slovakia is correcly called Slovak just like a person from Germany is a German and not a Germanian. There are however other countries were the -ian form is correct. There is complete chaos regarding these things in the English (and many other) languages. It is impossible to derive any rules whatsoever from this. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 00:14, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I would just like to add my opinion because I am Czech and I am glad the name is being changed to Czechia. All of this 'Czech Republic' business always seemed strange to me in English like why is our country the only one that is so strangely treated with its name. It really makes it very difficult if you are telling your friends you just went on a trip to Czechia you have to keep using the long name as if the short one doesn't exist, it makes people think that we Czechs would rather be called 'Czech Republic' for some strange reason, and so they keep repeating it to keep from being rude, when really it is the other way around. Also, sometimes it is better for an encyclopedia to use a term even if most people do not use it, just like when you type 'northern lights' into wikipedia you get an article titled 'aurora borealis.'

Everybody having the slightest idea of this, knows that, and if we hadn't the vandal/user "Nopuzzlestranger" alias "Wik" etc. here, the article would have been moved under Czechia long time ago... [[User:Juro|Juro]] 21:13, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

: Czech Republic is (AFAIK) the most known and currently used term and such should be reflected on Wikipedia. This has nothing with the vandal. [[User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] 01:07, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

:In most of the (more reliable) texts I've read on the subject, 'Czechia' was said to have been decided as the official shorthand (as in 'Germany') and 'The Czech Republic' was only to be used in official documents. It would therefore be technically correct to refer to the country as Czechia, as Wikipedia does not list countries by their formal names. Whether it is common for people to use the longer form should be irrelevent; it is still 'incorrect' as far as informal usage goes, and this should be reflected on Wikipedia, to heighten awareness if nothing else. --[[User:Made2Fade|Made2Fade]] 12:07, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

::Wikipedia has a policy of using common names. Correctness of the name is irrelevent. --[[User:Wikimol|Wikimol]] 16:11, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

::According to the article, it was the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs that made this decision, in 1993. But the [http://www.mzv.cz/wwwo/mzv/default.asp?idj=2&amb=1 English-language website of the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs] uses "Czech Republic" (or often just "CR") rather than "Czechia". If they don't take their earlier decision seriously, then why on earth should we? (In any case, what Wikimol says is right.) --[[User:Zundark|Zundark]] 16:38, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

I am not the debate is as objective as many people make it sound. There are many cases where the "long for", "short form", and common usage names of countires do not converge. France is common usage as well as the short form name, but the translation is "the French Republic". Switzerland is not even close. "United States of America" versus "Ynited States" versus "America" is another example. "Czech Republic" sounds fine and so is "Czech" for the name of its citizens. So much of this argument is based on emotion and a sense of "fairness".[[User:Gary Joseph|Gary Joseph]] 11:27, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I would really appreciate that you people at Wikipedia tell me where you came up with the name "Czechia." I believe the Czech hockey team wears the name "Czech Republic" on there jerseys, they do not wear the name "Czechia" or "Cesko." The term "Czechia" is not used in books, movies, magazines, or on sport equipment. The term "Czechia" is nothing but a plague found only on the internet. Using the term "Czechia" would mean that the Czech Republic is a single-nationality state, which it is not, and would create major conflicts among the many Germans/Moravians/Slovaks/Silesians that have historical roots in what is today called the "Czech Republic." The name "Czechia" or "Czech Republic" never existed before 1969 and there is certainly no way that Czechs will be able to rewrite all the history books changing the name "Bohemia" to "Czechia." '''Mike Jirousek'''

Would you PLEASE stop lying Mike? We've been through this... twice (see bellow). The Czech Republic existed before 1969. For gods sake. And the Czech team wears those jerseys as the Czech Republic is the official name still. Same as [http://www.wcoins.com/images/C412.jpg Slovakian coins] feature 'Slovenská republika' instead of 'Slovensko'. The ministry merely reccomended the use of Czechia as it's a more convenient term, they didn't wage a blood-thirsty jihad agaist all those who don't use it - I doubt they care if anyone uses it or not. -- Hexagon1 08:06, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


Should not "Česko" be mentioned at the top of the article? I know Czechia is not been accepted, but the Czech short name "Cesko" is very common. I would suggest this:

The '''Czech Republic''' ([[Czech language|Czech]]: Česko {{IPA-all|tʃεsko}}, officially {{lang-cs|{{audio|Cs-Ceska Republika.oga|Česká republika}}}}) is a [[landlocked country]] in [[Central Europe]] ...

[[User:Jirka6|Jirka6]] 22:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
: I agree, Česko should be mentioned here. --[[User:Kokpit|kokpit]] | [[User_talk:Kokpit|talk]] 21:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

:: Okay, I added the reference. (However, I do not feel adding reference to Czechia to the same place is appropriate. Unlike Cesko in Czech, Czechia is rarely used in English.) [[User:Jirka6|Jirka6]] 22:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

==Proposal to move (January 2005 - May 2005 discussion)==

I favor moving to the name Czechia.  The unfamiliarity of some is not a reason to use an incorrect name.  This is what redirects are for, right?
The current second paragraph is painful to read.  It seems disrespectful, as if we were saying, "The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1993 announced that the name Czechia is to be used ..., but we don't care."  The problem is not the phrasing, but the fact of it. [[User:Pekinensis|Pekinensis]] 19:16, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:I second it. [[User:Miraceti|Miraceti]] 19:23, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:: Me too, but this will probably entail an edit war ...[[User:Juro|Juro]] 22:28, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)


OK, we've had a concrete proposal from Pekinensis, seconded by Miraceti and Juro.  I add my name to that.  Since the proposal was made, three months have passed, and no-one has objected. To avoid a possible edit war I will do nothing for another couple of days, but '''if there is no objection posted here by the weekend, I will move this article to "Czechia"'''. 
It is none of our business as non-Czechs to argue whether it is a good name or not, and therefore most of the above discussion is irrelevant.  The issue is very simple: it is patronising to call any nation or group by a different name from the one they want.  They want it, we do it, that's how respect for other cultures works.  --[[User:Doric Loon|Doric Loon]] 07:40, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
: Unfortunately, you will not be able to put this over. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 15:55, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
::You mean it would be reverted?  I won't do it if there is not a majority here.  If there is, I hope the minority will respect that.--[[User:Doric Loon|Doric Loon]] 09:10, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
:: The problem is that I do not know whether they are a majority, but there are just certain people here who always revert any change towards "Czechia", because "they" do not use it...Maybe you should just try to move the page, let's see what happens, but I am quite sure it will be reverted...[[User:Juro|Juro]] 19:06, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The English name is Czech Republic, not Czechia. That's absolutely self-evident. Just search for the two terms in Google News. 6,620 to 12. [[User:NoPuzzleStranger|NoPuzzleStranger]] 09:56, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
: The point is that the English name is both Czech Republic and Czechia, but people do not know that and hence are using Czech Republic only. Most of the 6000 occurencies are a result of a huge and quite obvious error [because there is no reason for not using Czechia - a form that is correct, desired, does not hurt anybody and is short], that the Wikipedia has been supporting here for years, because its policy is basically to use anything having a majority in Google, although Google is a very bad reference, usually propagating popular mistakes.  [[User:Juro|Juro]] 15:55, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
::Well, I'm a native English speaker and I use it, therefore it is AN English form.--[[User:Doric Loon|Doric Loon]] 09:16, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I have just moved the page. It will need a lot of work to change everything but let's see what will happen after the first step. [[User:Miraceti|Miraceti]] 11:24, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
To add my comments: I am English and I have looked for a long time for a better description than Czech Republic. . Czechia is one the requested by the Czech Government, there is nothing awkward about it (we coped with "Czechoslovalia" for 70 years!). My Czech friends seem to approve.Wikepedia should certainly reflect the views of the official bodies of a nation as to how it is described. Placid

== Your Heading Here ==

In regards to some people considoring Czech and Czechoslavkian to be the same id like to bring up the issue of lineage. Is Czech Rep. or Slavakia the former Czechoslavkia that was created after WWI and as a result of the Great War. Its a East Germany meets West Germany situation because some would ask if it was East Germany that was formally Prussia and rouge or was it West Germany that  was forced to sign the Treaty of Versaillies. Can Slovakia list its date of independence as 1918? Both countries cant have the heritage and history. Because Nazi Germany only annexed the Czech part of Czechoslavakia and left the remainder that means that Czechoslakia was still Czech and Slovak because half remained to carry on the link between present and past. Slavakia lost WW II but did it independently so perhaps Wikipedia should list them as having Czechoslakia as their precurcor alone.
[[Vital component]] 4:22 am May 3rd

----

I'd just removed this remark:
:(the remainder of a once larger minority)
from demography. During and after WWII not only Bohemian Germans were expelled, but also most of Bohemian Jews and many Roma murdered in extermination camps, part of Hungarian population mostly of Slovakia was exchanged with Hungary and other things happened. I dont see other reason for that remark other than promoting German expellees agenda. [[User:Wikimol|Wikimol]] 22:12, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

== Religions ==

Does anyone know a source for the religion statistics (Roman Catholic 27%, Protestant 1%, Czechoslovak Hussites 1%, atheists 59%, the remainder uncertain)? The CIA Factbook gives different numbers (Roman Catholic 39.2%, Protestant 4.6%, Orthodox 3%, other 13.4%, atheist 39.8%), which sound more reasonable to me. --[[User:152.66.212.151|152.66.212.151]] 16:52, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

: The 2001 census, see [http://www.czso.cz/eng/redakce.nsf/i/basic_final_results_of_the_population_and_housing_census_2001]. Your numbers appear to come from the 1991 census (Czech only PDF: [http://www.czso.cz/sldb/sldb.nsf/i/D86E24A9E96E6C30C1256E630051315F/$File/SLDB1991-tab.3.pdf] ) though note that the 13% "other" is actually Not Identified, i. e. undeclared, and the Orthodox number seems still too high. 1991 was comparatively shortly after the fall of Communism and religion had a lot of sympathies so people declared for it it even without attending church regularly etc.; however, since then especially the Catholic church fell out of popular favour. The newer numbers are rather closer to the "true state" - we're a very atheist country. --[[User:Malyctenar|Malyctenar]] 11:27, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

==Improvement drive==
The article on [[Franz Kafka]] has been listed to be improved on [[Wikipedia: This week's improvement drive]]. Add your vote there if you want to support the article.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 06:17, 4 August 2005 (UTC)


== Culture\Food ==
I came to this article to find out what the 'not-to-miss' foods are.  Every country has a particular 'master dish' (apart, of course from my native England).  Unfortunately, I'm only going for a long weekend, but I'll do as much 'research' as I can, and maybe start a 'cuisine' stub :-) [[User:ChrisRed|ChrisRed]] 08:27, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Chris, even England has its "master dishes".  Ask the many thousands of tourists who search out Roast Beef and Yorkshire Pudding, Fish and Chips or Lancashire Hotpot (to name just three).  [[User:Skinsmoke|Skinsmoke]] 00:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

You need to wait since someone translates the article from Czech Wiki [http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%8Cesk%C3%A1_kuchyn%C4%9B]. As an appetizer think of beer and "heavy" food originally made for manually hard working people. [[User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] 18:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

== Czech Republic's incorrect formation and independence ==
The current information stating that the Czech Republic was formed in the 9th century is incorrect and nothing more than political propaganda, an effort to create a history for the Czech Republic, a multi-national (German, Czech, Silesian, Slovak, Moravian, Jewish) state which never existed before 1993. If there really was a "Czech Republic Kingdom" during the 9th century, I would like you to point out a map from the 9th century that had the "Czech Republic" on it. The name "Czech," replacing Bohemian, which Bohemia was a German-speaking state until the 17th century, can be found in writtings from no later than the 18th century. Before the 18th century, the area of today's Czech Republic was mostly German-speaking (3 million Sudeten Germans from Bohemia were expelled by the Czech government after WWII) and was usually referred to as Bohemia, other times was mentioned as a part of Austria, Silesia, Moravia, or Slovakia (the current region in SE Czech Republic called "Moravian Slovakia" is evidence of this). The statement that the Czech Republic "regained" its "independence" on October 28, 1918 is inaccurate as well because that was the date of the formation of the Czecho-Slovak Republic (called incorrectly Czechoslovakia for short in the English language). The Czecho-Slovak Republic was NOT an independent Czech state (notice that the name was "Czecho-Slovakia") but a union among the Slovak and Czech states, meaning Czechs were NOT independent. The only time in history that the Czech Republic was declared independent was on January 1, 1993. '''Mike Jirousek'''

:If you actually did your homework, you'd realise that the "Lands of the Czech Crown" (Země koruny České) appear on many maps around the middle of the last millenia, and that the Czech lands had not spoken German until the Czech lands became a part of the [[Austro-Hungarian Empire]], and even then Czech remained the language spoken by most communities. I also don't see how 3 out of 12 million is a majority. Also the statement that the Czech Republic regained its independence on October 28, 1918 is completely accurate as it became independent again, after being a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Your claim the Czech Republic has no history is contradicted by the fact I can trace my family line to the village of Mikulčice which was the capital of the Great Moravian Empire, and as Moravia is a part of Czech Republic, this is another example of Czech history.In your statement you reffer to a place called Moravian Slovakia.  The region "Moravian Slovakia" is '''informally''' called so due to it's proximity to Slovakia, and the name didn't catch on usage until the mid-1800s. You are obviously under the impression that the Czech Republic and Bohemia are separate entities. No, Bohemia is a predecessor and now the main part of the latter. -- [[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] 11:14, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

:The fact, that present-day English name of this country ("Czech Republic") differs from its traditional and officially obsolete one ("Bohemia") doesn't make this country the youngest in Europe. Its Czech/Bohemian name ("Čechy" or "Česko") is the same from its very beginning in the 9th century, which should be enough for you to realize that your original hypothesis is completely wrong. [[User:Qertis|Qertis]] 12:37, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

::Jirousek is a fool, and clearly is pushing some weird nationalist agenda of some sort (I can't figure out ''what'' nationalist agenda, though).  I will add that the Czech Republic quite clearly has exactly the same boundaries as the "Lands of the Bohemian Crown" which remained in Habsburg control after 1742.  In that sense, it is quite an old political entity, dating back to the high middle ages.  That said, I will take issue with a few points that Hexagon makes - 1) the "Austro-Hungarian Empire" did not exist until 1867.  There were certainly Germans in Bohemia and Austrian Silesia before that.  If what is meant is that there were not Germans until the territory came under Habsburg control in the 16th century, I don't think this is true either.  My understanding is that the Germans began settling the "Sudetenland" in the later middle ages - under the later Premyslids, or perhaps under the Luxembourg kings.  There was, of course, further Germanization after the Thirty Years War in the 17th century.  2) While I think that asserting continuity between the Czech Republic and the Bohemian Crown is perfectly appropriate, I do not think that we should assert continuity back to Great Moravia, which is separated from the foundation of the Czech state by some years. [[User:John Kenney|john]] [[User_talk:John Kenney|k]] 14:50, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

If the Kingdom of Bohemia really belonged to Czechs, then why did you Czechs change the name of your country from Bohemia to "Czech Republic." If Bohemia was Czech, then why does the name come from the German tongue? Understand that I am openminded to these, but so far there is not the slightest fact that proves your opinion is accurate. It you can show me for example some really old document that has the word "Czech" or any translation of it (Cesi, Cesko, etc.), I will re-think it. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:207.200.116.10|207.200.116.10]] ([[User talk:207.200.116.10|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/207.200.116.10|contribs]]) 06:14, 27 November 2005 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

We didn't change the name, Bohemia has, and is known in Czech as 'Čechy', the same word used for Czech Republic as a whole. And the word Bohemia comes from the name of a Celtic tribe, the Boii who were the first inhabitants of CR. If I show ANY old document it will have the word Czech or translations. -- [[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] 14:50, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

:Exactly, difference between Czech and Bohemian exist only in english language. In czech (a much more complicated language) they are the same. I can show you tons of documents that has word "Cechove" in it, literally translated as "Czechs" ! I completely agree with Hexagon. Jirousek is wrong on many levels. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:62.77.100.41|62.77.100.41]] ([[User talk:62.77.100.41|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/62.77.100.41|contribs]]) 10:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


-------------------------------------------------------------

But CZECHS as a Nation starts somewhere around 400 AC <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:66.81.166.238|66.81.166.238]] ([[User talk:66.81.166.238|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/66.81.166.238|contribs]]) 21:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:I'm sorry, but what does that have to do with anything? Are you trying to say that the Bohemian lands don't 'belong' to the Czechs? Politically they do. End of story. And there is no other way that land can 'belong' to a nation then politically. In all other ways the only thing that matters is who inhabits the land and it's inhabited by mostly Czechs. And start signing your posts, as no-one will take you seriously. -- [[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] 04:41, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

== The "Czech Lands" ==

I am not aware of any map in English, French or German, that would have ever used the term "Czech Lands" or "Czechia" or "Czech Kingdom" before 1918. Even Masaryk himself used "Bohemia" or "Bohéme" or "Böhmen" in his English, French and German correspondence. The reason why the term was used in the Czech language before 1918 is simply due to the reason that the Czech translation for Bohemia is "Chechy". During sport events supporters of the Czech Republic shout "Cechy, Cechy" to this day. 

Hence the correct terms from a historical point of view, if the current Czech name is taken as the basis, would be "Bohemia" in English, Bohéme in French and Böhmen in German.

However after 1918 Czechoslovakia wanted to differentiate itself from its historic predecessor "Bohemia" by creating a linguistic nation state similar to Germany, Russia or Hungary, which in my opinion was a major mistake and a main reason why the country broke apart in 1938 as it excluded Germans, Hungarians and Poles (40% of the population in total). In 1918 Masaryk and Benes suddenly started to promote and introduce the name "Czechoslovakia" into the English language. Hence the multilingual Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia were suddenly to become a "monolingual state of the Czechs". After 1918 the terms Tschechei was introduced in German. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:62.2.144.114|62.2.144.114]] ([[User talk:62.2.144.114|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/62.2.144.114|contribs]]) 09:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:Again, czech lands and bohemia are the same. The difference between "Czech" and "Bohemian" exists only in english. The reason why Masaryk used "Bohemia" is probably because the word Bohemia was better known. Czechoslovakia never wanted to differentiate itself from it's historical predecessor of Bohemia, however it is important to note that Bohemia was predecessor only partially - only of the czech part. --[[User:62.77.100.41|62.77.100.41]] 10:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

== Tschechei ==

The name "Tschechei" has nothing to do with Hitler and Nazism what so ever. It is also in no way derogative. It appeared first in 1918 after Czechoslovakia was formed. In fact only left wingers used it initially as the political right in Germany and Austria rejected the new state. However the very fact that it was used in the German language it was later rejected by the Czechs and I believe that this is the only reason why Czechia is now rejected as a state name and "Czech Republic" used instead. While the German language is more flexible, and the term "Tschechei" could be changed to "Tschechien" to fulfill Czech wishes not to use "Tschechei", English does not provide the same option, hence "Czechia" is still rejected.

All in all we are dealing with the typical problem in the Czech Republic: Teh society is still unable to cope with it's partly German past, and it's historic (forced) interconnection with the German cultural area. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:62.2.144.114|62.2.144.114]] ([[User talk:62.2.144.114|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/62.2.144.114|contribs]]) 09:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:No, this is completely wrong. The term Tschechei and "Resttschechei" was used by Hitler and the Nazis. (It was by coincidence, yes, but that is irrelevant, because it just was used by them.)  That's why it is considered derogatory (being derogotary has something to do with emotions). The term Tschechien, however, is an older (actually the original) alternative and was not used din the 1930s and by Hitler that's why it was chosen by German linguists in 1992 after consulations with Czechs. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 07:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

::Hitler simply used this term as it was the German name of a part of Czechoslovakia and commonly used in Germany and Austria at the time. in fact it still is used in popular language. It is not derogatory at all. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:84.73.207.125|84.73.207.125]] ([[User talk:84.73.207.125|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/84.73.207.125|contribs]]) 22:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

== Besides on Wikipedia, the name "czechia" doesn't exist ==
If the Kingdom of Bohemia really belonged to Czechs, then why did you Czechs change the name of your country from Bohemia to "Czech Republic." If Bohemia was Czech, then why does the name come from the German tongue? Understand that I am openminded to these, but so far there is not the slightest fact that proves your opinion is accurate. It you can show me for example some really old document that has the word "Czech" or any translation of it (Cesi, Cesko, etc.), I will re-think it.
The name "Czechia" doesn't exist on the jerseys of Czech hockey teams, soccer teams, etc... In fact, using the name "Czechia" would be oppressive and arrogant for the millions of non-Czechs (Germans, Moravians, Slovaks, and Silesians) that live in what has been called for the last 12 years the Czech Republic. The Czech Republic has no flag, coat-of-arms, history, and name for the territory it occupies.

*The flag, before 1993, was the flag of Czecho-Slovakia. The blue color on the flag represents Slovakia, and is therefore oppressive and imperialistic. The Czech Republic has no right to use the flag of another country.

*The coat-of-arms of the Czech Republic never existed before 1993. It consists of the coat-of-arms of many different (non-Czech inhabited) territories such as Silesia, which is a 1400 year old state that was divided between Bohemia and Poland. It also consists of the coat-of-arms of Moravia, a territory which belongs to Slovakia (www.slovakia.org).

*The name "Czech Republic" was used for the first time in history in 1969 and was accepted on January 1, 1993. There were territories located on the present-day Czech Republic, but they were not Czech! Naming the Frankish Empire a "czech" state would be like naming the Roman Empire a "hungarian" state. Just because the Frankish Empire included parts of today's Czech Republic, doesn't mean that the Frankish Empire belongs to Czech history. The word "Czech," being found in writings no earlier than the 18th century, can not be applied to states that existed on the territory of present-day Czech Republic before the 18th century, such as Bohemia.

*As it is known, there is no name for the territory that the Czech Republic occupies. The name "Czechia" doesn't exist. The Czech Republic, being a multi-national state, consists of Bohemia (occupied by Czech, Germans, and Jews), Moravia (occupied by Slovaks and Moravians), Sudetenland (80% occupied by Germans), and Silesia (occupied by Silesians, Poles, and Czechs).
'''Mike Jirousek'''

:It's a nonsense at all! [[User:Zanatic|Zanatic]] 20:46, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Mike. As long as the Czech Republic itself doesn't use the name "Czechia" why should we? This Wikipedai encyclopedia is not to promote unaccepted ideas. Making an article called "Czechia" would be like allowing someone to make an article called "Czech Republic is the third world country of Europe." $$$=^^&^

Your idiotic remarks show no familiarity with Czech history what-so-ever. I will counter your arguments in point-form, which you used.

*The blue part represented Slovakia in the Czechoslovakian flag, it is now used to represent the Czech part of Silesia.

*And the Australian coat-of-arms hadn't existed until 1901, yet Australia has 40,000 years of history before that. Your point is? By the way, Bohemia '''is''' a part of the Czech Republic, and as Silesia is divided between Poland and Bohemia, it's in the Czech Republic. Additionaly, Moravia is not and never has been a part of Slovakia, read my reply to your post "Czech Republic's incorrect formation and independence".

*I have three words for that. ''Země Koruny České'' (Lands of the Czech Crown). For more details, I will reffer you once again to my reply to your "Czech Republic's incorrect formation and independence".

*Are you also saying that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland actually has no-name? It is, afterall just a grouping of England, Wales, Scotland and N. Ireland... Are you also suggesting the term Czechia just popped into the heads of thousands of people? (I'm not saying it's popular, just that it does exist), oh and what is your obsession with classing Moravia into Slovakia? They are geographically close, but Moravia is definitely in the Czech Republic (my mum's from Moravia, and she'd rather class herself as an eskymo then a Slovakian) +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] <sup>([[User talk:Hexagon1|t]])</sup> 14:15, 20 October 2005 (UTC)


Is Jirousek really saying that Moravia is part of Slovakia? I think he is to be ignored. As to the title of this section, it is quite clear that the name "Czechia" does exist outside wikipedia. That does not change the fact that it is considerably less frequently used than "Czech Republic," though. [[User:John Kenney|john]] [[User_talk:John Kenney|k]] 14:53, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

===Czechia/Czechy versus Czech Republic===
I have only skimmed superficially the debate and vote above, but I'm thinking that if the government is really adament about (re-)introducing the name ''Czechia'' or ''Czechy'' as a short-hand alternative for ''Czech Republic'', then it ought to be given due prominence above the Country Infobox. Compare [[Russia]]/Russian Federation and [[Portugal]]/Portuguese Republic and [[Mexico]]/United Mexican States and [[Greece]]/Hellene Republic. I suppose there ''are'' in fact a handful of countries that English speakers will routinely refer to as "[adjective] Republic", either for reasons of disambiguity or for reasons of political correctness (such as [[Dominican Republic]], [[Central African Republic]], [[Republic of Ireland]] and [[Democratic Republic of the Congo]]). ''//[[User:Big Adamsky|Big Adamsky]] 02:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)''

== Demographics? ==

I've removed this paragraph. It doesn't say anything about Demographics.
<blockquote><i>In 2005 Czech Prime Minister Jiri Paroubek announced an initiative to publicise and formerly recognise the deeds of Sudeten German Anti-Nazis, including members of the German minority. Although the move was received positively by most Sudeten German expelees and the German minority, there has been criticism that the initiative is limited to Anti-Nazis who actively fought for the Czechoslovak state, but not Anti-Nazis in general. The German minority in particular also expected some financial compensation for their mistreatment after the War.</i></blockquote>
Maybe there should be special section about Sudeten German issues, so people won't write these things everywhere.

I also rearranged some other sentences and paragraphs about bilingual signs and replaces some words with less strong meaning. "are forced to" and "fears repercussions" sounds like Czech Republic is police state which actively intimidates its citizens.
[[User:Podlesh|Podlesh]] 09:29, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

== Czechia again ==

''The country is sometimes refered to as '''Czechia'''.'' [[User:Qero|Qero]] has taken this line out five times now. That will not bring us anywhere.  Please discuss here before changing again. [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 15:45, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Releated aricle: http://zpravy.idnes.cz/domaci.asp?r=domaci&c=A060215_202831_domaci_ad --[[User:CHeese|CHeese]] 16:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

:This has been discussed previously. Just check Google News to see what serious sources use. I get 13,400 hits for "Czech Republic" and 9 for "Czechia". Obviously "sometimes" is an overstatement here. And one of those 9 hits is an article titled "Czech Republic still lacks one-word name in English" [http://www.praguemonitor.com/ctk/?id=20060216F00103]. [[User:Qero|Qero]] 17:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

It is a nonsence when somebody is claiming the word ''Czechia'' is not official. Indeed, the Czech government has forgotten to announce a short name to a Carthographic council of the United Nations, so that this council had to fill it by the long name Czech republic, where it is up to now. But: in 1993 and once again in 1998 the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated in a memorandum to all embassies, that CZECHIA should be used as a equivalent. They do so by themselves. See e.g. [http://www.czechforum.net/showthread.php?t=321&highlight=czechia here].  [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

== Bohemia again ==

From the ancient times, throught the middle ages the name was Bohemia. In 1918 they renamed one of the most regarded and admired countries in the world. In about six decades that country went from first world to third world status. My family emigrated Bohemia before the WW2, we fled Europe from the Nazis, but also because we felt that out homeland was disgraced. The main indication of a cloudy future was the real estate prices drop in 1918 when Czechs declared independence. They removed the very name that connected them with their past, they trashed the name of kingdom of old, the name of the land our fathers came from, the name that can be traced back for thousand years (!) 

So called "Czech-whatever" is now one of the poorest nations in Europe, devastated by mostly self-inflicted causes like socialism, communism and exiled people. Whole nations were expelled from their mother land others fled from the oppresive regime. Communities of mostly germanic and jewish people were forced to leave their homes, estates and towns. Czechs then renamed most of the acquired towns, woods, lakes and even mountains giving them a new names, the names we cant even pronounce. Proud towns of old, names echoing centuries back to middle ages like Budweis were disgraced with tags like "Ceske Budejovice" etc.

Many Czechs today only gaze at the glamorous historic chateaus that can be seen all over the country. Prime example of splendour of nobility and richness once present in Bohemia. This is another example of how bad decisition may damage the whole nation/country.
: Someone from IP address 84.42.158.159 (Czech Republic IP) deleted this post. I expect another attempts to remove this article, because it represents general point of view of Germanic people (not Czech people) that lived in Bohemia (Sudeten mostly) whose property was confiscated by Czechs under the Benes' ruling. The hot topic of recent Czech talks with European Union. It also represents similar fate of many Jews that lived in Bohemia before WW2, families of whose were killed in concretation camps by Nazis, their children survived the war but were never allowed to see their homes again (because their homes were confiscated or squaterred by Czechs). --[[User:IEEE|IEEE]]

::Oh, get a life. Seriosuly. Have you noticed that the government who seized the property was being infiltrated by communists? And what country DIDN'T pass similar decrees after ww2? The borders of what is today the Czech Republic have existed for hunderds of years, have a look a the administrative divisions of Austria-Hungary. Just because lots of Germanic people settled there doesn't make it theirs. And stop trying to push through strange and stupid agendas, this isn't LiveJournal (here's a thought, go whinge there), we are trying to write an encyclopaedia here. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User talk:Hexagon1|talk]])  [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 15:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Thank you kindly for your instant police work and insults. European Union has been reluctant to support those Benes' decrees and for a good reason. Majority of Czechs today don't understand why is that. General Czech thinking is that those evil Germanic people were occupying them so they have a right to seize and rename everything within Bohemia's borders. And yes, Bohemia borders have existed for hunderds of years, but not "Czech Republic" borders. There was always multinational status of Bohemia where not only Czechs lived and that is another reason for this nacionalistic new title "Czech Republic" be turned down. Of course, from the point of view of an Australian things may look black and white, but please educate youself more on the topic or at least try not so blindly support Czech claims which are flawed. Look at historic books and maps to view how many cities in South Bohemia and other regions were originated by Germanic people and were under their influence ever since. Have a nice day. --[[User:IEEE|IEEE]]

::::Sorry about me going off a bit, I was a bit frustrated. Germany's government has itself stated it will not pursue the claims of Sudeten Germans who lost property after World War 2. (I remember reading that somewhere) The relocation plan was a plan concived by the victors of World War 2, not the Czechs. Churchill himself supported the relocations (until it was time to oppose and blame the relocations on the Soviets - it's all in [[Expulsion_of_Germans_after_World_War_II|here]]), it was the Potsdam participants who wanted the relocations to prevent any similar war from ever happening. And they didn't rename everything, but the Czech names which existed for hundreds of years came into common usage, as Czech was once more the official language of the region. In fact, the borders of the Czech Republic have existed since at least before the Austro-Hungarian Empire, [[:commons:Image:Österreich-Ungarn_1898.jpg|this map]] outlines the borders of Böhmen, Mähren and Schlesien almost identical to the borders of today's Czech Republic. The original ČSR was just a [[:Image:Czechoslovakia1927.png|federation]] of Bohemia, Moravia (incl Silesia), Slovakia and Subcarpathian Rus, the Soviets ''"borrowed"'' the S.C. Rus, and the Slovak Republic came into being on the territory of Slovakia, and the Czech Republic came into being as a grouping of everyone else. Later the Czechs and Slovaks broke it off, that's how today's CR and SR came to be. The Sudenten regions, were however located in Bohemia, a Czech land. The Germanic people might have inhabited the Czech land, but it remained the land of Bohemia, in Czech 'Čechy', the land of the Czechs, and the WW2 victors kicked them all out. Whinging about it today is not going to achieve anything, especially if the German government itself doesn't want to do anything about it. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User talk:Hexagon1|talk]])  [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 05:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

== Czechia ==

If the government have decided that the name Czechia should be used most of the time, I think it should briefly be mentioned in the introduction even if it hasn't caught on. I'll do accordingly unless I can get an explaination of why the government encouraged name shouldn't be mentioned in the introduction. I suggest we add something like this line to the introduction "The Czech government have encouraged the use of the name Czechia for all informal situations but this has not caught on in English usage.". Then we can leave the full explaination later on in the article. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] 17:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

: in 8st century Bohemia
: in 9st century Bohemia
: in 10st century Bohemia
: in 11st century Bohemia
: in 12st century Bohemia
: in 13st century Bohemia
: in 14st century Bohemia
: in 15st century Bohemia
: in 16st century Bohemia
: in 17st century Bohemia
: in 18st century Bohemia
: in 19st century Bohemia
: to 1918 Bohemia
: 1918-1940 Czechoslovakia (Jews and Czech nationalists takeover)
: 1940-1944 Protectorate of Bohemia & Moravia 
: 1945-1993 Czechoslovakia (Germans silenced or expelled under Benes' decrees ruling)
: 1993-2006 Czech rep. Slovakia 
: Current socialist/Czech nationalist goverment under "Jiri Paroubek" is the same labourers goverment type who decided removal of Bohemia in 1918 (strongly opposed by Jews and Germanic citizens), socialists former labourers obviously didnt know anything about history, naming conventions, latin and so forth, its one big shame. At least Wikipedia community should not support this nacionalistic country renaming habbits proposed by people that continuously degrade and undermine former Bohemian multi-ethnic status. Czech nationalists always wanted to silence Germans, Jews a other nations living in Bohemia. [[User:Atlanticus|Atlanticus]] 04:46, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

::And now in the Czech language:
::since the time of the Celtic Boii (Bójové) and the Germans (not "Deutsche"!!!!!) to 5th/6th century -> Bohemia (no Czechs there)
::9th century -> a part of Velká Morava (Grand Moravia) -> No Germans (Deutsche), no Jews there
::10th century -> founding of the Czech statehood, the Bohemian land settled only by Czechs and called Čechy (Czechia)
::11th century -> Čechy, for the first time becomes a kingdom
::12th century -> Čechy, since 1198 definitely becomes a kingdom (no Germans there!)
::13th century -> Čechy, beginning of the German immigration (founding of the towns and settling the border area, which is already partly settled by the Czechs!!!)
::14th century -> Čechy
::15th century -> Čechy
::16th century -> Čechy, since 1526 Čechy, Morava & Slezsko belong to the Austrian crown
::17th century -> Čechy, after 1620 the hardest germanization of the Slavonic countries Czechia (Bohemia) and Moravia
::18th century -> Čechy
::19th century -> Čechy
::20th century -> up to 1918/19 the Království české (Czech Kingdom)
::1918 - 1938: Czechoslovakia -> Czechia (Bohemia) + Moravia + Moravian Silesia + Slovakia (Uplands) + Ruthenia
::1939 - 1945: Protektorát Čechy a Morava (Protectorate Czechia and Moravia)
::1945 - 1992: Czechoslovakia without Ruthenia
::since 1993: Česká republika (Czech Republic), Čechy + Morava + Moravské Slezsko (Czechia/Bohemia + Moravia + part of Silesia)
::Thus Czechia ≠ Czech Republic, because Czechia = Bohemia. Bohemia is not being used in the Czech language. Does anyone want to tell me, we have no history????? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:LJM|LJM]] ([[User talk:LJM|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/LJM|contribs]]) 17:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

Just a remark for possible readers: Both the name list and every second word from the previous contribution are completely wrong. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 01:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Just a remark for possible readers: User [[User:Juro|Juro]] acts like Czech nationalist, see his previous posts. [[User:Atlanticus|Atlanticus]] 22:26, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

:Ummm.... Atlanticus, are you insane? Czech nationalism is very different from Czech revisionism, something not practiced. Czech nationalism take-over? WTF? Jews and Germans silenced/expelled? I don't know what you're going on about jews, but a similar anti-German legislation was enacted almost everywhere in Europe after WW2. And what are you talking about 'czech nationalist government'? Do you expect it to be Romanian nationalist? Or are you just drunk? Removal of Bohemia? Huh? I don't know what the hell you are on about in the rest of your post. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User_talk:Hexagon1|talk]]) [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 06:17, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

::Ummm... Czechs renamed country that was for thousand years called Bohemia. There was no referendum about that. Czechs dont want you to know about many things of their cloudy past after 1945. That is why European Union is reluctant to fully integrate Czechs as they caused such a harm to Germanic people under the Benes' rule back in 1948. Czechs stole much of the lands from Sudeten Germans and Jews (yes Jews, many of wich were exiled 'cos of Nazi Germany) after 1945, do not mentioning the renaming of so many ancient places and towns. Ask any Sudenten German and they will tell you about. Or look at any map from 10 to 20 century, today and compare. [[User:Atlanticus|Atlanticus]] 09:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:::No, in Czech Bohemia has always been 'Čechy'. Read my responces to people bellow and above on this page, they answer the rest of your post as well. And please sign using '<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>', it produces a sig that includes the time and date, like this: +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User talk:Hexagon1|talk]])  [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 06:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm opposed to Czechia being used to refer to the Czech Republic in Wikipedia, for the simple reason that it's not the official name and no such short form is used in the Czech Republic. A short form IS used in German, I believe, and that may be relevant to the German Wikipedia but is it relevant to the English one? People here are talking about a decision of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (can someone provide a URL please?) but that Ministry doesn't have the authority to determine the country's official name which -- and I don't think this is in dispute -- is "the Czech Republic" after all. Is it really that onerous to type an extra two words? --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 11:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

:Such a short form is used in CR, and it's 'Česko', the Czech language equivalent of Czechia, as I noted at [[Talk:Eurotel]]. And I'd like the URL too. Google is no help in this department, and I'm too lazy to email them. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User_talk:Hexagon1|talk]]) [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 11:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

And, as I replied there, it's use in the Czech Republic is limited to colloquial situations (such as [[TV Nova]], where they use it to "jazz up" otherwise drab material). I've NEVER seen it used in anything even remotely resembling an official context. Anyway, the Česko debate is somewhat removed from the present one (as Arwel notes below), which is whether Czechia has any legitimacy in the English language. There I'd agree with Arwel: "Czechia" is a non-entity. --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 16:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== "Dismemberment" ? ==

Is the dissolution of Czech/Slovakia best referred to as "dismemberment", as in the country infobox? [[User:68.39.174.238|68.39.174.238]] 23:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

: Obviously "dismemberment" is inappropriate and POV. There are other problems with that info box, too. It shouldn't say that the Czech Republic was formed in the 9th century. That isn't true. It was formed on 1 January 1993 by an Act of Parliament. --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 11:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== An idea - why not go by postage stamps? ==

An idea just occurred to me for a quick and dirty (and effective) way to determine whether to use the long or short form of a country's name on Wikipedia. Why not just go by whatever name the country uses on its postage stamps? You'd think if 'Česko' was such a good abbreviation they'd use it on stamps, where there is so little space. But they don't! I wonder why? --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 13:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I can repeat it for the 100th time, why not: '''CZECHIA is the fully official short form for Czech Republic''', it is explicitely written (in its English form) in Czech LAWS and STANDARDS, it is explicitly prescribed by Czech authorities, and is contained in UN lists (although they seem not to be on the web yet). The only reason not to use it is incredible ignorance peculiar to many people from English-speaking countries. And this ridiculous completely irrational ignorance, which people try to justify here by anything that comes to their minds, goes so far that the Czech themselves frequently avoid the short form (after all, the long form is ALSO correct) for the simple reason that nobody has told to most English-speakers (because unlike for other languages there is no true language regulator for English) that it is a fully correct, desired, historical and logical name of the Czech Republic. And as for the infobox: the Czech '''Republic''' arose in 1993, but '''Czechia''' arose in the 9th century. That's the difference. And it is the same difference like between France vs. French Republic vs. French Empire. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 15:08, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

: Dobry den Juro. I've been living here in the Czech Republic for 15 years now and I make my living from my knowledge of the Czech language. If you take a look at the Czech Wikipedia, you will see that a similar debate is raging there. Are all those Czechs that oppose Česko just ignorant? Can you cite the law that says Česko is the official name? Your rage aside, what do you think of my postage stamp idea? --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 15:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

:I'm amazed that this argument is still going on here after two years. As it happens, I like the current state of the article with the description of the origin of the term "Czechia" in a subsidiary section. However, Juro, you must realise that English language dictionaries are descriptivist, not prescriptivist - they describe the English language as it is used, they do '''not''' prescribe how it ''should be'' used. There is no central authority of English usage like the Academie Francaise for French, and no-one can demand that a particular word be used; what the Czech authorities would like to be used is completely irrelevant, what counts is what the great majority of English speakers use, and that is ''not'' "Czechia". -- [[User:Arwel_Parry|Arwel]] ([[User talk:Arwel_Parry|talk]]) 16:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

::To both, I have discussed the same thing here at least five times. So do not consider this an excuse, but I am not going to do anything for this anymore. Those who speak Czech, will find enough information even on the web and in the Senate debate. I just had to point out that the name IS official. It is both in the big Czech language dictionary from the 1970s(?), in the state standard for names to be used in foreign languages and in the UN lists (although someone has indicated to me here that the list on the web does not contain it) etc. etc. Also, I do not know in which Czechia you have been, because the Czech word Česko is being used regularly by everybody know (in TV, newspapers, everywhere). Even people who were strong opponents finally changed their mind (even from the Czech wikipedia). Secondly, you have to distinguish whether you want to argue that name is not official (which is definitely not the case as mentioned above) or that it is not used. As for the second this is "professional terminology" and has nothing to do with usage (unless there is another correct short-form for Czechia, but that is not the case). Do you thing people know say the names of parts of  some special device, unless someone explicitely says them that its name is XY?? They don't. And as an encyclopaedia (and not a frequency dictionary) it is our "obligation" to provide correct information whatever 95% of people think. And those 95% people think that the Czech Republic has no official short name and that is just wrong. And the stamps, just like many other things, use the long form because they were designed in 1992/1993 when it was not clear yet whether the final short name would be the historical word Czechia or some new creation. And as I mentioned above, ironically, the Czechs themselves avoid the correct word Czechia, because nobody, including the wikipedia, (except few English encyclopaedias) is able just to tell the general Americans unambigously that "Czechia" is correct. Nothing more, no propaganda or things like that, is necessary. The day this happens, the word will be used immediately, because it is short, exact, systematic and clear. Czech politicians and authorities have totally underestimated the current ever increasing chaos in the English language, although all linguists warned them in the 1990s, and now that they have grasped the problem, the disaster is already here. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 04:48, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Juro, you don't have to repeat anything. What I'm interested in is what you haven't said. First, you still haven't cited the number of the law that makes Česko official (don't worry, I will be able to look it up and read it), and you still haven't said what you think of my postage stamp idea. If Česko is "short, exact, systematic and clear", why isn't it on the country's stamps? --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 07:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

::Read what I have said above, the answers are there. And as for the number of the standard (also used by the UN), look it up for yourself, I will not invest any further second into this, since there are some users (the banned user NoPuzzleStranger alias currently Oruj) here that will revert anything. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 01:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:::"Czechia" is ridiculous, funny, stupid and insulting name, but if you deface and rename historic region that has well established name for thousand of years then you surely do not deserve any better. --[[User:IEEE|IEEE]]

:Czechia isn't the official name, it's merely the recommended short-form. Same as American stamps bear the initials of the full name, not "the States" or "Estados Unidos", or even "United States", and coins of Slovakia contain the text "Slovenská Republika". I think Czechs should use Česko on their stamps too, but it's NOT the official short-form, just a recommended short-hand, unlike "Slovensko" +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User_talk:Hexagon1|talk]]) [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 11:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

::No Hexagon, READ what I have written above, there is no other possibility how to make a word more official - it is contained both in linguistic dictionaries, and in the prescribed geographical terminology (standards) and was recommended by the parliament and was explicitely sent TWICE to foreign ambassies and has been entered into UN lists. Actually, there is hardly any other Czech word that is more official than this one. The only thing that could be done more is to impose embargos on countries that do not use the short-form :)). So do not confuse your personal impressions and feelings with the reality...And as for "recommended" - if you refer to the letter to ambassies - can you imagine a letter from a country to another country saying "We '''order''' you to use the following short-form...."? - I can't. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 01:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Jeez luise, I've got to stop agreeing with people, they always bite me in the ass. Well how come Belarus was successful, and Czechia wasn't then? And I'd like to see the documents stating that, please. Any official Czech letters/laws/whatever stating that Czechia should be preffered. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User_talk:Hexagon1|talk]]) [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 06:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:::The answer is firstly, the case of any particular is country is specific, secondly, Belarus started a kind of name "jihad", and the jihad was successful. Most importantly, I have to repeat it for the nth time: Czech Republic is definitely '''ALSO correct''', but in different contexts. In other words in most cases you can never say to someone using "Czech Republic": Oh no, this name is wrong. The Belarussians however consider the other (SHORT and LONG) forms derogatory and can always say (and they do): White Russia etc. is just plainly wrong. And finally, the Czechs are a quite modern nation and they mostly just did not care whether others use the long form or short form...and this discussion shows the result of such "not caring".[[User:Juro|Juro]] 01:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

To Juro: sorry for overlooking what you said about stamps. Now that I've read it though, I can't believe my eyes! The Czech Republic comes out with new stamp designs all the time! But none that say Česko. Juro: do you live in the Czech Republic? --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 15:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Stamps are irrelevant, Smithfarm. But as I already mentioned, the name on stamps was set at a time, when it was more sure to use the form Czech Republic, and it has not been changed since. And names on stamps do not use to be changed, if there is not a total renaming (because people create series etc.). Otherwise: No comment. [[User:Juro|Juro]] 01:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

==Proposed Policy about the CR/Czechia issue==
Live and let live. For now, CR will be kept here. When you see CR on Wikipedia you don't change it to Czechia and vice-versa. When editing, just leave what-ever the article uses. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User_talk:Hexagon1|talk]]) [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 11:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

:No thanks. "Czechia" is not an English word (it's not in actual use, it's in no English dictionary, and the Czech government has no authority to create new English words) so there will be no "live and let live". [[User:Oruj|Oruj]] 13:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

::What's with the hostility? You come up with a better compomise then. The Czechia-supporters won't just disappear because you want them to. And the Czech government has every right to create English words, just like you or me, as there is no official body controlling the language. Whether they catch on is another matter. If no-one's allowed to create or modify English words, how did it evolve from Old English to today's English then? Magical lepricons of DOOM? :) +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User_talk:Hexagon1|talk]]) [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 06:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree that anyone can create neologisms but people should think twice about saying that a name is official if they can't back it up. The idea that the Czech Government (Vláda) or Parliament has ever issued any official document saying "Czechia" is an English word seems preposterous to me and I won't believe it until someone provides evidence. I have heard there was a hearing in the Senate about Česko (don't know about Czechia but again, it seems preposterous). The fact remains, however, that Česko is not used in any official documents or on postage stamps. It's conspicuous by its absence! Juro is advocating that we "educate the masses" about Czechia but he needs to come up with a citation to back his claim before we embark on that road. If and when he does provide the citation, we could put the following in the article: 

: "According to [document number this and that], the recommended short form of the country's name in English is Czechia. This form, however, is not in widespread use. In the Czech Republic itself there is significant opposition to a proposed short form (Česko) and, though it has gained a degree of acceptance in spoken Czech, it is hardly ever used in writing."

--[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 15:57, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== Public Hearing in the Czech Senate ==

Full transcript is available [http://www.senat.cz/xqw/webdav/pssenat/original/27462/23545 here] - warning: it's in Czech and it's in [[Microsoft Word]] format. --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 16:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

It's interesting reading. It says, among other things, that the official document Juro is referring to was issued by the Czech Geographical and Surveying Office "with the support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs" (not BY the ministry at all) and that it was issued by the Czechoslovak Federal office in 1992 - before the Czech Republic came into existence. Since that time no Czech government body, not even the surveying office, has issued any document on the subject. When the UN asked the Czech authorities to provide a short geographical name, NOBODY REPLIED and so it defaulted to "Czech Republic". Another interesting thing that one of the speakers noted: the case of the [[Dominican Republic]] is analogous. Linguistically, you can make a noun out of any adjective, but that doesn't mean it will be used. --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 16:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

::Again, you have picked out, what you wanted to pick out, and distorted it. Also, note that this (political) text is supposed to be a hint, not a professional source (except for the contributions of linguists in the debate).[[User:Juro|Juro]] 01:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

:There is lack of respect for the state's official name, naming and written language in general. Also Czech Goverment Office employees doesn't understand English well, furthemore (and thankfully) they have no right to create new English words. Take Czech language itself as a horrible example of misused latin, they write most of the words exactly as they speak, without any respect to the written language. Look how badly they named (or mostly renamed) the old towns, streets etc. For example "Budweis" renamed to "Ceske Budejovice", "Carlsbad" renamed to "Karlovy Vary". Even historic places with rooted names for centuries were renamed to awful Czech versions and that happened all recently in 20th century. Of course that region now mostly occupied by Czechs has an official name, take a look at all maps from the early middle ages to the year 1918. I wonder whether Russian influrence has anything to do with this massive renaming of the last 80 years, it is like if they tried to shoot themselves in the heel or something. --[[User:IEEE|IEEE]] 

::Oh, here we go with strange nationalistic agendas again, do you honestly think English is closer to Latin then Czech? That's rich. Where are all the cases then? And I'd much rather prefer a phonetic language, and so would 80% of all English speakers and all people who are learning English as a second language, but the deviations between pronunciations would make it impossible to agree on any spelling. And your Czech renaming argument is illogical. Karlovy Vary was founded by Charles IV, and I'm sure as soon as it was founded it had a 'proper' Latin name and a local Czech name. ČB was founded by a knight of King Otakar II of Bohemia, and I'm sure the situation was similar although in his time the local language would have been prevailing over Latin due to Bohemia's independence back then. What do you mean historic names for places? The Czech names have been around for a hell of a lot longer then the English names. Prague was speaking Czech and Latin when English still looked like Danish. And Bohemia? That referred only to the part that is now.... also known as Bohemia. The CR encompasses Moravia and Czech Silesia too. And yes, something we don't like so, after making an illogical argument, we blame those EVIL communists in Russia. After all, everything wrong with this fault is Russia's fault. I'll stop insisting on Czechia though. I mean, honestly, who cares. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User talk:Hexagon1|talk]])  [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 10:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

:::So you can't stand other people's opinion, how nice. English is much closer to Latin then Czech that is Slavic language (has nothing in common with Latin). And you didn't understand my point, its all about written language (usage of Latin characters), you can't write words phone- exactly (you obviously don't know why). Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV was Franconian not Czech and he founded Carlsbad not "Karlovy Vary" same apply for Budweis. Bohemian Kingdom contained Bohemia, Moravia & Silesia yes, in times borders and some lands were excluded/included, but that region was never called Czechia or by any other Czech derivative in the west, always Bohemia. Czechs that are Slavic in origin naturally despise English/German/Latin naming so that is why they insisting upon renaming of old Germanic places/names. And the "Russian factor" cant be overlooked, because Slavic Russians also prefer Slavic naming over English/German/Latin equivalents. Why for example even czech beer brewers still use "Pilsen Urquel" instead of "Plzen Urquel" or "Budweis-er" instead of "Ceske Budejovice-xx" for naming of their beers then ? --[[User:IEEE|IEEE]] <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:84.242.95.132|84.242.95.132]] ([[User talk:84.242.95.132|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/84.242.95.132|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

::::Just on the last question, the beer brands you mentioned are only for export. In the domestic market they use the names "Plzensky Prazdroj" and "Budejovicky Budvar". --[[User:Smithfarm|Smithfarm]] 14:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

::::I can stand other people's opinion - just not when they're babbling complete non-sense. English is a GERMANIC language. Latin is a ROMANCE language. You could say that English got most of the vocab and Czech got the complex inflections and what's-not from Latin. I don't really get your sentence there about me not understanding, (ironic, but true), if you mean that Czech is written informally, like it's said, then that's complete non-sense. Even I have difficulty reading Czech legal texts due to the complex cases of inflection combined with really long words, and I'm a native speaker. And I don't quite get you in regards to the Latin alphabet. Please elaborate. I never said Charles called the city he founded "Karlovy Vary", we don't know what name he prefered as back then he was forced to use Latin, but it obviously had a local Czech name ever since it was founded, what - do you think it was refered to as "you-know-where"? Same for ČB. And now as Czech is a dominant language in CR, they would obviously use Czech names for cities. Your argument against the term "czech" makes no sense either, czech refers collectively to Bohemia, Moravia and Czech Silesia, not just Bohemia. Bohemia is STILL known as Bohemia, nothing has changed. And if you think the Czechs renamed it from Bohemia to Čechy, you are crossing languages, Bohemia is, was, and most likely always will be the name for the region in English, where-as Čechy is, was and most likely always will be the name in Czech. As for your "Russian influence", I have two words. Prove it. And Smithfarm's comment dispelled your illusions about beer quite well. '''PS: Do NOT remove the strikethrough through your signature. If you are IEEE, log in and then you can remove the strike-through. For all we know, you could be an imposter.''' +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User talk:Hexagon1|talk]])  [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]] 23:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

:::::Ok, but this thread was started because of missing English names, I don't care about Czech names. Furthemore I meant "Latin" characters because Czech is using Latin and English also, English is at least paying respect to Latin alphabete/characters, Czech language not. Russians for example invented their own characters and didn't try to mess with Latin. I hate what Czech did to all names that === WAS USED === IN THE PAST AND WAS === RENAMED === RECENTLY by Czechs. Rosenberg ==> Rozmberk ? What is that? After 1918 Czechs renamed towns, hills, rivers etc. that is fat FACT. This needs to be remembered. And if you try to silence people that remember things, whose family is deeply rooted to lands that was renamed and devastated by Czechs that is really scary. Things really changed because this lands were never officially called "Czech-xx" ever before 1918. And the beer named "Plzensky Prazdroj" is Czech domestic market beer, that has nothing to do with my point, my point was about old naming that those beers still carry "Pilsner Urquel" in this case as a proof of my previous point about old names. btw: showing Australian flag in this disscusion is quite odd --[[User talk:IEEE|IEEE]]
::::::: And would you like to know WHY most german names of towns were removed or are you just trying to push your german-revisionist-vision through? You know, lands of Czech Crown (that's slightly bigger area than nowadays Czech Rep) was under influence of Austria - and since 1620 (defeat of Czech estates on White hill near Prague) you could almost call it "subjugated" country. There were many laws/writs/whatever which forced ordinary Czechs to learn german, because all clerks HAD to speak german just to hold their office. All official documents were in german. And acording to number of uprisings (many, believe me) Czechs really weren't happy with state of affairs. So when they finally threw off austrian yoke in 1918, they were happy to remove dual (czech-german but more like german-czech) naming and started to use names which had been used for centuries. Before you write such crap, get some facts. 06:18 12 Jan 07 
::::::You honestly think English is closer to the Latin pronunciation then Czech? Dream on. The closest living descendant of Latin is obviously Italian, and Czech is closer to Italian in the phonetic and grammatical aspects then English. Russians invented their alphabet? That actually made me laugh out loud. The Cyrillic alphabet is simply an evolved form of the Glagolitic alphabet brought to Moravia (today the Czech Republic, btw) by the Saints Cyril and Methodius from Thessaloniki. I can't comment on Rosenberg because I don't know which one you mean, but I suspect it was just phoneticised to correspond with the original pronunciation. And your beer argument is incomprehensible. The flag is in my SIGNATURE you nong, as you should have noticed it appears everywhere my sig does. Everytime I sign a post the Aussie flag appears. Lot's of people do this, eg [[User:Royboycrashfan]], [[User:Swatjester]], [[User:Kungfuadam]], etc. and even more put other things such as smiley faces or Esperanza e's or a's. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User talk:Hexagon1|talk]])  [[Image:Flag of Australia.svg|30px]]  06:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

==  >Zanatic< calling Czech Republic > "CECHO" like GECO! insult! there is no such country in NATO! no such hockey team.) ==

Please see there is majority German speaking people supporting this usage.   Czech

:Evidence? [[User:Zanatic|Zanatic]] 11:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
   
:thats easy one. yours and any other person changing this, as can be seen on their user page.   Czech

I am not German nor speak German very well. [[User:Zanatic|Zanatic]] 11:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

:please see  user page for proof.  Czech

== vandalism by 71.99.xxxxx ==

From the IP address beginning with 71.99. there are some vandalistic changes here and on the main page. The same happened in the German Wikipedia, and quite extensive in the Czech Wikipedia, where there was a range block for 71.99. It is an IP from Florida. See [http://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Speci%C3%A1ln%C3%AD%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=Wikipedista%3A71.99.0.0%2F16 here]. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:32, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

See also [http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedie:N%C3%A1st%C4%9Bnka_spr%C3%A1vc%C5%AF/pmp here]. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I like to see some proof! Personal attack! There where never ever any changes made by me to the MAIN PAGE!  Czech

::read: ''main page'', not '''''M'''ain page'', so it means main page ''Czech Republic'' in contrary to this ''talk'' page. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 08:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

:: Main page its main page! Watch your Words! This IS personal attack and lie! I repeat: You can't change the Truth by posting Lies!  Czech

----
correcting its not vandalism.
blocking 71.99.. is not acceptable by wiki policy. 
there is more users, than people living in  Czech Republic!
jkb is PRO-CESKO
I am   PRO-Ceska republika
that is not vandalism. but conflict of interest.

Note >jkb<  is another German speaking user rnforcing usage of Czechia or CESK0 on wiki wolrdwide.

Czech
----
the same happens at the present on approximately one dozen of wikipedias, see my notices above. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

== but now it seems to be quite settled down in the language as it is widely used in Czech media.  ==

What at this sentence is not true? [[User:Zanatic|Zanatic]] 10:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

:let google count occurences for "Ceska republika" and "Cesko", you even need not to filter out correct forms like "cesko-nemecky". Your position is biased and you are misusing wkipedia for promoting your personal opinions. Czech media is not Czech people. The quality of Czech language used in Czech media today is too often worse then bad.  You may revert my changes as many times as you like but this doesn't mean that you are right. This might be only the evidence, that you have much more free time then me.  [[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 10:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

::We don't treat the level of Czech media, do we? The sentence is true. (This week I have no free time, however this article is for me worth of wasting my time.) [[User:Zanatic|Zanatic]] 10:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

:::You are wasting something more important then your free time. Cesko is used in Chczech media, but saying plain that too many Czech journalists speak a very low language would spoil your argument, thus this fact must be erased. Should I count Czech intelectuals who objected against Cesko? Surely not, it would be just a waste of time. [[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 10:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

::::Wikipedia does not describe the world of intellectuals but of all people. If it's used by media, it's widely used, no matter what the quality of the media is. (I don't think Czech media would use very low language comparing them to media in any other country, but that's not the point.) [[User:Zanatic|Zanatic]] 10:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

:::::I have reverted my last edit to your previsous formulation. My objection is that media is not only corruptiong our culture but even our language. I do not have time today to follow the discussion.   [[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 11:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

=== A comment on Czechia ===

Undoubtedly it is right that ''The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1993 announced that the name Czechia is recommended to be used in all situations other than formal official documents and the full names of government institutions''. But is this recommendation still fulfilled?  Go to the web page of Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs

http://www.mzv.cz/

and try to find Czechia in English pages. The result today is just two
records. Not much for ''officially recommended name'', is it? The
question is what is their search engine, but anyway Czechia does not
seem to be heavily supported by the ministry.

The corresponding text should be adjusted. [[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 15:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
:I'd still prefer Czechia over [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Czech_Republic&curid=5321&diff=55082806&oldid=55002509 Czechland].... :D +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] <sup>([[User talk:Hexagon1|t]])</sup> 14:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

::... and I prefere Czech Republic, so what? [[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 09:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
:::That was a joke, you didn't get it. I don't mind which is used, but use CR mostly myself. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] <sup>([[User talk:Hexagon1|t]])</sup> <sub>08:26 31 05 2006</sub>
::::Sorry! I really missed your point and I must agree with you. I know only about one alternative worse than Czechland and it is "Morče" (Mor-ava and Če-chy ... fortunately this prank cannot be translated to English). --[[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 07:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
::::: :D I get it, I speak Czech. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] <sup>([[User talk:Hexagon1|t]])</sup> 09:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia must take the first steps in promoting the name Czechia, instead of the Czech Republic.  The Czech Republic is much too formal and awkward.  The Czech government and people support the name Czechia and the only argument we (English speaking world) have against it is the lack of use in English of Czechia.  Why not make the title Czechia (Czech Republic) until all users become familiar with the name Czechia.  This should avoid all confusion amongst English users while promoting the correct name and respecting the wishes of the Czech people.  (Sorry I have no signature, not yet a user but frequent editor). May, 26 06

::@ 69.159.66.192: Seveal times I reverted here some vandals who changed permanently Czechia to Czech republic as I think Czechia is a correct short name. But note this: Wikipedia is here '''''not to promote''''' something, just to describe existing. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 08:04, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Permanently reverting  Czech Republic to Czechia is nothing but '''promoting Czechia''', you simply ignore opinion of all those who do not share your point of view. Calling Czech Republic Czech Republic is not vandalism. [[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 09:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

What i meant in my above comment (the unsigned one on Czechia) is that the title could be a compromise.. for example Czechia (Czech Republic), or Czech Republic (Czechia).  In using the brackets confusion should be minimized while still using the official name. By the way where do I sign up to get a username..? May 27 2006

::::::See Log in / Create Account on the top on the right side when you enter Wikipedia. Klick there - no risk no fun :-), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

: Wikipedia is not play ground. When [[The Economist]] starts to use Czechia than and only then it is time to switch here. [[User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] 19:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
To whoever keeps changing the religions section to that 2001 census, PLEASE STOP! I have several more reccent scources that say otherwise. For example: a travel guide using facts made in mid 2004 by Czech people, a 2005 almanac, and the 2002 cia world factbook.
(QZX)


== Pro-Czechia activists ==

Yesterday I updated section "Name" to reflect the current situation when the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs is clearly not promoting Czechia and as a proof I recommend to visit official web page of the Czech Republic by the ministry. My text was:

:The official name is '''Czech Republic'''. Colloquial [[Czech language|Czech]] single word name is ''Česko'', disputed by many [[Czech people]] but frequently used by others. ''See [[Names of the Czech Republic]] and [[Czech lands]].''

My edit was reverted without any explanation or comment by [[User:Juro]].

I am returning my edit back because there was no proof given that my edit was wrong.   I suggest that all who would like to use Wikipedia as a place for promoting ''Czechia'' visit official web of the Czech Republic (www.czech.cz) first.

--[[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 08:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

=== [[User:Juro|Juro]] reverts again ===

... so we have a problem. To solve it, lets state the facts first:

# The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1993 suggested that the name Czechia be official alternative in all situations other than formal official documents and the full names of government institutions, but this has not caught on in English usage.
# in 2006 the official web of the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not using Czechia any more, see http://www.czech.cz/

These two facts are in contradiction and surely belong to the article [[Names of the Czech Republic]]. The question is, if these also belong to the article on the [[Czech Republic]]. I am sure that without full explanation these should not be given here. Thus I am reverting two recent edits by Juro back.

--[[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 14:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

=== [[User:Juro|Juro]] reverts once more ===

As Juro calls for information, I have added relevant information on existence of the official website of the Czech Republic, where Czechia is not used in 2006

:The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs in [[1993]] suggested that the name '''Czechia''' be official alternative in all situations other than formal official documents and the full names of government institutions, but this has not caught on in English usage. The official website of the Czech Republic (www.czech.cz) run by the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not using the name ''Czechia'' in [[2006]]; its [[Czech language|Czech]] equivalent ''Česko'' is disputed by many [[Czechs]], but frequently used by others. ''See [[Names of the Czech Republic]] and [[Czech lands]].''

Changing many to some is futile, try simple google search

In a case of another revert by Juro I am going to call for assistance the Mediation Cabal (as the first step)

--[[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 07:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


Now the section is almost correct. Still I have one more comment. Juro mentions Dictionary of the Czech(?) Academy of Sciences [Czechoslovak(!)] 1970. In my edition from 1989 [Slovník spisovného jazyka českého, ČSAV, Ústav pro jazyk český] I read: 

:(zastaralý výraz) '''Česko''', -a s. ''Čechy, Čechy a Morava'' (Na rozdíl od Slovensko); nově ČSR (od r. 1969)

[(obsolete) Bohemia, Bohemia and Moravia (as in contrast to Slovakia), (newly) Czech Socialist Republic (since 1969)] ... association of ''Česko'' with the Czech '''Socialist''' Republic is enough for many Czechs enough to consider it discredited. ... but there are no doubts about Česko being a Czech word.

But here we are talking about Czechia. My objection was that in spite of all official documents even the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not seem to support Czechia today.

The question is if this detailed comment should be given here (should it be also explained here that Česko had a different meaning than the one more commonly used today? I don't think so!) My opinion is that all this  would better fit into [[Names_of_the_Czech_Republic]].

--[[User:Cepek|Cepek]] 16:56, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

==Cubic Zirconia==

This page redirects from CZ, which is a common abbreviation for cubic zirconia. Can we make a disambiguation page that includes cubic zirconia? [[User:Single guy|Single guy]] 13:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
:I agree. [[User:JanSuchy|JanSuchy]] 14:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

== Motto ==

Is anyone able to provide a reference for the motto ''Truth prevails''? I could find no evidence that it used as a national motto; the best I found was [http://wtd.vlada.cz/eng/aktuality.htm], which states that the motto was used in the coat of arms of Czechoslovakia after its liberation in 1945. [[User:Pruneau|Pruneau]]<sup>[[User talk:Pruneau|talk]]</sup> 11:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[[Image:Flag of the President of the Czech Republic.svg|200px]]
:It is written on president's flag. --[[User:Li-sung|Li-sung]] 17:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks a lot! [[User:Pruneau|Pruneau]]<sup>[[User talk:Pruneau|talk]]</sup> 22:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

== Religions of the Czech Republic ==

Somebody kepps changing the religions section to that old 2001 cencus. I have more than enough sources that show more recent facts such as a 2005 almanac, a travel guide using facts from 2004, and the 2003 CIA world fact book. 59% OF CZECHS CANNOT BE ATHEIST!!! In 2000 over half of the Czech Republic was religous (most of which Christan). So how could 59% just change to atheism in 1 year?! Changing faith is not like changing internet service, you don't just get bored of beliving in god and overnight you go from a devout beliver to a strong disbeliver. Besides in 2000 38% of Czechs were nonreligious or atheist and in 2003 39% percent were. wouldn't it be strange 38 to spike to 59, and then drop to 39? There must have been a misunderstanding of a 2001 cencus. (QZX) <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:71.244.247.155|71.244.247.155]] ([[User talk:71.244.247.155|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/71.244.247.155|contribs]]) 22:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

: Sorry, but I can not agree. 2001 is up-to-date '''census''' in Czech Republic and is more relevant as raw estimations of CIA or only raw investigation. No census was in Czech Republic in 2003!!
:*1) Where are reference for you alternative numbers?
:*2) How are originating this numbers?
:*3) Problem with numbers is easy. Only cca 4% of Czechs visit chapel constantly (one times in week, on Sunday). Here is a great many people, for which is beliving only tradition or actual turn of mind. [[User:Cinik|Cinik]] 19:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Census means ''the process of obtaining information about every member of a population''. Last two census in the Czech Republic were in 1991 and 2001. '''Everybody''' was asked about religion and "no religion"  responded 4,112,864 citizens (39,9 %) in 1991 and 6,039,991 citizens (59 %) in 2001. --[[User:Li-sung|Li-sung]] 21:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

:Don't you think the cia would try to use the most relevant information in their "raw estimate?" QZX <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:71.244.247.155|71.244.247.155]] ([[User talk:71.244.247.155|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/71.244.247.155|contribs]]) 22:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

::What is it "more relevant informastion"? What is more relevant source of information as census? [[User:213.29.96.163|213.29.96.163]] 12:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

:::See exact results [http://www.czso.cz/sldb/sldb2001.nsf/tabx/CZ0000], section 5 {{In lang|cs}}, [http://www.czso.cz/csu/edicniplan.nsf/p/4110-03] and [http://www.czso.cz/csu/edicniplan.nsf/tab/7A002DF559]. --[[User:Michal Jurosz|mj41]] 19:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding of my last entry, what I meant was that if the cia made "raw" estimations in 2003 after the 2001 cencus was made, wouldn't they base them around the 2001 cencus? Also, you are suggesting that all of the researchers working for 2 different almanacs, the cia, and a group of Czech experts have no clue what they are talking about. Not one person of that group even noticed the most accurate source, they all are just making blind guesses on information from 1991 (which, I may add was when the Czech Republic and Slovakia were still united)! You say we cannot get any accurate information from any other source other than a cencus that is taken every 10 years. I'm not saying the 2001 cencus is wrong, I just want to know why 4 different sources from completely dependable companys are wrong and cannot be belived. QZX <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:71.124.76.234|71.124.76.234]] ([[User talk:71.124.76.234|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/71.124.76.234|contribs]]) 22:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:Census is only one acccurate source about everyone citizen. All others are raw estimates. I don't know primary sources of CIA and why are source from CIA so diferent. (I only know, what accurate and actual was CIA's maps of Belgrade in time [[bombing of Yugoslavia]]. :-) ) [[User:Cinik|Cinik]] 17:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
::I second that. Even while I am personally taking CIA factbook generally as relevant source of information, if compared to well carried census ... there cannot be comparison. 

::In this issue, there can be some missunderstanding of what that mean to be atheist. Generally in Czech republic is great distrust to any kind of organisation concerning spirituality, while actual scepticism toward existence of any Deity itself could be a little less prominent (however still being perhaps the highest in the world). ''[[User:Reo On|<span style="color:blue;">'''R'''</span><span style="color:lightseagreen;">eo</span>]]'' [[:cs:User:Reo On|<small><sup>ON</sup></small>]]  |  [[User talk:Reo On|<span style="color:blue;">+</span>]][[:cs:User talk:Reo On|+]][[Special:Contributions/Reo On|<span style="color:lightseagreen;">+</span>]] 22:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

There was previously a 2005 "Eurometer poll" that stated that 19% of  Czechs belived in a god but 53% belived that there is a spirit or life force snd 30some didn't belive ina god, is this scource accurate and dependable? It seems more in tune with the 2001 cencus QZX <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:QZX|QZX]] ([[User talk:QZX|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/QZX|contribs]]) 15:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:The only one reliable source is census. E.g. edit about a lot of Budhists in CZ is simply a nonsense. [[User:Tulkolahten|Tulkolahten]] 19:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

::Who said there were alot of Bhuddists in the Czech Republic? I never said that! There is propably a tiny group, but not "alot". Where did you get the idea I said there were alot? QZX <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:QZX|QZX]] ([[User talk:QZX|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/QZX|contribs]]) 23:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

== Non-standard and potentially POV map should be reverted ==

The map for this country has recently been changed to a format which is not standard for Wikipedia. Each and every other country identifies that country alone on a contintental or global map; none of them highlight other members of relevant regional blocs or other states which which that country has political or constitutional links. The EU is no different in this respect unless and until it becomes a formal state and replaces all other states which are presently members; the progress and constitutional status of the EU can be properly debated and identified on the page for that organisation; to include other members of the EU on the infobox map for this country is both non-standard and potentially POV.

Please support me in maitaining the Czech Rep's proper map (in Wikipedia standard) until we here have debated and agreed this issue? Who is for changing the map and who against? The onus is on those who would seek to digress from Wiki standard to show why a non-standard and potentially POV map should be used. The Czech Republic deserves no less! [[User:JamesAVD|JamesAVD]] 15:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

:This user has decided to remove references to the EU from the page of every member state, and is now spamming this message on every talk page. See his talk page for more details. [[User_talk:Yandman|<span style="color:red;">'''yandman'''</span>]] 15:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
::Please do not discuss here, but at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries]] so a uniform decision can be reached. [[User:Kusma|Kusma]] [[User_talk:Kusma|(討論)]] 15:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

The users above are misrepresnting my actions. Certain non-standard items have been included in the infoboxes of the pages of some European states. I have removed the undiscussed and unsupported changes and started a discussion here on the best way forward. I have in no way 'removed references to the EU'! The EU is an important part of the activities of the governmenance of many European states, to the benefit of all. That does not mean that an encyclopedia should go around presenting potentially POV information of the constitutional status of the EU in the infoboxes of states which are supposed to be standardised across Wikipedia. I'm interested in what users here feel? Please feel free to comment at any of the various pages Yandman might suggest. [[User:JamesAVD|JamesAVD]] 15:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

:'''PLEASE DISCUSS THIS AT''' [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Location_Maps_for_European_countries--_discussion_continues]] as it involves more than just this country.  
:Thanks, &mdash;[[User:MJCdetroit|MJCdetroit]] 20:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

== How do you pronounce Czechia? ==

I see there's a mass of discussion above about this name vs. Czech Republic: advocates for Czechia, the longer it takes for you to give an IPA pronunciation, the longer it will take to be adopted. [[User:Njál|Njál]] 18:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
:::::" do not use such nasty word.
:::::pmp <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:71.99.116.25|71.99.116.25]] ([[User talk:71.99.116.25|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/71.99.116.25|contribs]]) 16:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:{{IPA|/ʧekiə/}} --[[User:Li-sung|Li-sung]] 18:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
::Shouldn't that be an "h" rather than a "k"?  [[User:logologist|logologist]]|[[User_talk:logologist|Talk]] 07:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:::No, It is pronounced as the word "Czech" {{IPA|/ʧek/}}  + ia.   --[[User:Li-sung|Li-sung]] 08:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

== About the name of our country: Czech Republic, Czechia, Bohemia??? ==

Czech Republic = official name

Czechia = presented as the short name of the Czech Republic, but in the fact it is a synonymum for the older name Bohemia, which is not normally being used by Czechs and the other Slavonic nations

Bohemia = older version of Czechia, mostly used in the German and Roman languages

The Czech Republic consists of Bohemia/Czechia + Moravia + Moravian Silesia

If you already have bought any souvenir with the name CZECH, I can make you sure, you are wearing a nonsense! 

Czech = holder of the passport of the Czech Republic

Czech = nationality

Czech = language

Czech = adjective

-LJM- <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:LJM|LJM]] ([[User talk:LJM|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/LJM|contribs]]) 18:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:I'm sorry but you are wrong. CZECHIA is NOT synonym for the older name of BOHEMIA. BOHEMIA had always been BOHEMIA. Same for MORAVIA. Same for SILESIA. Former CZECH KINGDOM (or CZECH LANDS or The lands of the CZECH Crown) included three historic lands: BOHEMIA, MORAVIA and SILESIA (part). CZECHIA is one-word designation for the country formed by BOHEMIA, MORAVIA and SILESIA. Is it now clear to you? --[[User:85.207.40.58|85.207.40.58]] 20:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

::Exactly, he is absolutely wrong. Czechia = Czech Reublic = Bohemia + Moravia + Silesia
::Bohemia in Latin means "Cechy", the western part of Czechia. Bohemia is used here in the name of many companies and sports clubs... <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:82.99.172.135|82.99.172.135]] ([[User talk:82.99.172.135|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/82.99.172.135|contribs]]) 18:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:::Czechia is simple nonsense never ever used. '''[[User:Tulkolahten|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Tulkolahten≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Tulkolahten|≈talk≈]]</sup>''' 02:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Czechia is nonsense only for you. It is true that it is not used, because Czechs do not use it. They did not like the name Cesko either. Now it is clear that Cesko will be used more and more. Only few opponents of Cesko will remain. And the same thing will happen with Czechia, it just will take longer, because Czechs will have to start using it themselves. Foreigners will learn it very quickly and without any difficluties. The suffix -ia has NOTHING to do the with Balkan. It is from the Latin language, and you can see it in Nova Scotia, West Virginia, California, Australia, Austria, Italia, District of Columbia...<small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Wikista|Wikista]] ([[User talk:Wikista|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Wikista|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:You must be kidding. Czechia is more then silly and hasn't any historical context. What about Englandia or Canadia ... no way. '''[[User:Tulkolahten|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Tulkolahten≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Tulkolahten|≈talk≈]]</sup>''' 15:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
:: Yes and guess why... Czech Republic/Czechia exist only 13 years, no wonder it is not enough time to create and start to use one-word name of this state...--[[User:85.207.40.58|85.207.40.58]] 22:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Google: Česko: 13,000,000, Česká republika 3,500,000, This is pretty clear. Czechia has more historic context then Czech Republic. It is only your personal feeeling that you do not like it. Englandia is non sense, it is Anglia, in Czech Anglie. [[User:Wikista|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Wikista≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Wikista|≈talk≈]]</sup> 21:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

== No history? ==

Ne maš dějiny? There's no article on the history of the czech republic? It's really too bad that nothing has happened in the Czech republic since 1993, aside from joining the EU and Nato. The past 16 years must have been really boring. =) - [[User:Themightyquill|TheMightyQuill]] 19:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

== Barebones ==

Does anyone else think this article could use a few more details, albeit, if credible? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Zurkhardo|Zurkhardo]] ([[User talk:Zurkhardo|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Zurkhardo|contribs]]) 08:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

== Proposed WikiProject ==

In my ongoing efforts to try to include every country on the planet included in the scope of a WikiProject, I have proposed a new project on Eastern Europe at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Eastern Europe]] whose scope would include the Czech Republic. Any interested parties are more than welcome to add their names there, so we can see if there is enough interest to start such a project. Thank you for your attention. [[User:Badbilltucker|Badbilltucker]] 16:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

== The dissolution of Czechoslovakia ==

The dissolution of Czechoslovakia was DEFINITELY on December 31 1992, NOT on January 1 1993. Please correct it in the article, I have tried once, but it has been changed back. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Wikista|Wikista]] ([[User talk:Wikista|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Wikista|contribs]]) 15:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:That's not true. It was 1st January 1993. '''[[User:Tulkolahten|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Tulkolahten≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Tulkolahten|≈talk≈]]</sup>''' 15:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
::As I understand it, the last moment in which Czechoslovakia existed was 31<sup>st</sup> December 1992 at 23:59:59, and on 1<sup>st</sup> January 1993 at 00:00:00 the Czech and Slovak Republics came into being on the former territory of Czechoslovakia. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] <sup>([[User talk:Hexagon1|t]])</sup> 12:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

What is not true? You wrote it correctly now, the dissolution was on Dec 31 and NOT on Jan 01. And the Republics started to exist on Jan 01. ([[User talk:Wikista|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Wikista|contribs]])

Ehm: and the one second from 23:59:59 to 00:00:00 did not existed neither Czechoslowakia nor Czech republic?? :-). Czechoslowakia dissolutuion was definitely 1. 1. 1993 in the same time of creating of Czech republic. [[User:Cinik|Cinik]] 06:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
:Good point [[User:Cinik|Cinik]] :-) '''[[User:Tulkolahten|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Tulkolahten≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Tulkolahten|≈talk≈]]</sup>''' 10:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

::Actually, no. The second immediately following the transition between :58 and :59 seconds falls under the 59th second. After this second expires, the transition takes place between :59 and :00, at which point the ČSFR ceased to be and ČR and SR came into being. The transitions, by definition, take no time to happen. Sorry if this sounds complex. So, from a scientific viewpoint, the changeover happened in an infinitesimally minute unit of time, somewhere between 23:59:59:999 and 00:00:00:000. If you want, I can draw a diagram, however for the sake of everyone's sanity I suggest 1<sup>st</sup> January 1993 is used as the date. +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] <sup>([[User talk:Hexagon1|t]])</sup> 01:27, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
:Any idea why the dissolution was done like this? Just to screw with not-yet-existant wiki editors? - [[User:Themightyquill|TheMightyQuill]] 03:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
:: As I understand it, the legislation stated something like "At midnight, 1<sup>st</sup> January 1993, the Czech and Slovak Republics come into being on the territory of the ČSFR", so it obviously stems, that the dissolution took place between the last second of 31<sup>st</sup> December 1992 and midnight of New Year's Day 1993. As the time it takes to "change over" to the next second is infinitesimally small, it becomes obvious that the dissolution was an evil plan by [[Xenu]] and psychiatrists to destroy Czechoslvoakian [[thetan]]s. :) +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] <sup>([[User talk:Hexagon1|t]])</sup> 01:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

:::lol For what it may be worth, [[National Geographic Society|NGS]] map ''Europe'' (December 1992) mentions the following: <span style="color:red;">''On August 26, 1992, the leaders of Czechoslovakia agreed to the peaceful division of the country into two independent nations, scheduled to take effect January 1, 1993.''</span> - Best regards, [[User:Evv|Evv]] 05:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
::Afaik it was on New Year's Eve, so I suggest 1st January 1993. Sounds better for me. '''[[User:Tulkolahten|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Tulkolahten≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Tulkolahten|≈talk≈]]</sup>''' 10:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

== Location maps available for infoboxes of European countries ==

<div style="background-color:#e8f0ff;">On the WikiProject Countries talk page, the section [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Location Maps for European countries|Location Maps for European countries]] had shown new maps created by David Liuzzo, that are available for the countries of the ''European continent'', and for countries of the ''European Union'' exist in two versions. From [[November 16]], [[2006]] till [[January 31]], [[2007]], a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. Please note that since [[January 1]], [[2007]] all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of [[February 4]], [[2007]] the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.<br/>As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before [[February 5]], [[2007]] a survey started that '''will be closed soon at [[February 20]], [[2007]] 23:59:59'''. It should establish two things:
*whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions),
*which new version ([[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Creator's comment on the whole long lasting discussion/New maps with and without EU-marking available|with of without indicating the entire European Union by a separate shade]]) should be applied for which countries.
Please read the [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Location Maps for European countries|discussion]] (also in other sections [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#New maps for Middle East|α]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Location maps (again)|β]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Middle East Maps|γ]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#A final solution for the entire maps issue?|δ]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Stop forcing map change|ε]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Gallery of different map formats|ζ]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Greece|η]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Comments from a dazzled Greek|θ]]) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the '''[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Final survey|presentation of the currently open survey]]. You are invited''' to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.<br/>There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote ''for'' one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — [[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] <span style="font-size:.87em;">[[19 Feb]][[2007]] 00:13&nbsp;(UTC)</span></div>

==[[:Category:Germanic culture]]==
Czech culture has been add to the new [[:Category:Germanic culture]] by an editor (not me - I'm trying to sort it out!). Please discuss this to ascertain whether this is appropriate or not - and act accordingly.--[[User:Zleitzen| <span style="color:firebrick;">Z</span><span style="color:darkgreen;">leitzen</span>]]<small>[[User_talk:Zleitzen|<sup style="color:orange;">(talk)</sup>]]</small> 13:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
:That seems to be wrong category, Czechs as a Slavic people have nothing to do with Germans. '''[[User:Tulkolahten|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Tulkolahten≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Tulkolahten|≈talk≈]]</sup>''' 13:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

:I thing it is logical. Czech kulture was developing in symbiosis with germanic culture and has many similar items... [[User:Cinik|Cinik]] 18:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC) But - on the other side - czech kulture is not germanic and is not subset of germanic culture. [[User:Cinik|Cinik]] 18:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
::Coexistence with the other culture doesn't make a merge between those cultures. I understand what do you think and it is correct point of view, but equivalent for a Germanic culture is a Slavic culture. Our entry there is redundant so I removed it. As I saw today disappeared other countries from there, so I think original editor had a little bit hot keyboard while writing that :) '''[[User:Tulkolahten|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Tulkolahten≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Tulkolahten|≈talk≈]]</sup>''' 19:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)