Talk:Kyiv/naming

Requested move 3 October 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Snow not moved (non-admin closure) {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 23:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

---

Kiev → Kyiv – Official name of the capital of Ukraine is Kyiv, official logo of the city in English says "Kyiv", the name "Kyiv" is very often used in official documents of many countries and in the press, so the current title of the article can confuse Wikipedia readers. 46.63.38.5 (talk) 01:16, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

• Support per nomination, of course, a hundred times, which seemingly is the number of debates which have swirled over and over and over the city's exonym. There is a separate link above, created solely to discuss this very issue. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 02:00, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose - Kiev is still the WP:COMMONNAME in English, and this is English Wikipedia, nothing has changed from the former discussions._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 02:27, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Nothing has changed since the last (monthly) discussion. There is no more evidence that the English name of Ukraine's capital has changed than there is evidence that "Prague" has suddenly become "Praha". --Taivo (talk) 03:55, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:UE. "Kiev" is a well-established word in English and there is no reason to replace it for political reasons. Academicoffee71 (talk) 03:58, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose, not English. The proposer has been previously blocked for misbehavior at this page, is currently blocked for two weeks, and needs to learn how to drop the stick.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:UE. This is still overwhelmingly the common name in English. Softlavender (talk) 08:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:UE. English usage is overwhelmingly "Kiev". --Khajidha (talk) 08:34, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:UE. English usage is still overwhelmingly "Kiev", and it's not likely to change within the foreseeable future, if ever. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 08:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose - Once again oppose. This is the correct spelling in English. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:11, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose for all the usual reasons as enumerated above. Good grief, not again. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:11, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. English language usage is absolutely, undoubtedly, and overwhelmingly "Kiev". --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose and speedy close. No change in consensus since the last RM.  ONR  (talk)  20:30, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose For all the reasons given above most especially WP:COMMONNAME. Jschnur (talk) 21:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

List of English-language media outlets now using Kyiv spelling (will be continuously updated; don't archive)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

List of major English-language media outlets now using Kyiv spelling (continuously updated; don't archive).--Piznajko (talk) 16:33, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

• Deutche Welle English (example: http://www.dw.com/en/ryanair-now-flying-to-ukraine/a-43100647 )
• RFE/RL English (example: https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-savchenko-hunger-strike-court-hearing-/29117487.html )
• Ukrinform English (example: https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-economy/2427721-ryanairs-management-signs-agreement-with-managers-of-borispil-and-lviv-airports.html )
• UNIAN English (example: https://www.unian.info/politics/10055093-poroshenko-congratulates-ukraine-s-security-service-on-26th-anniversary.html )
• Interfax Ukraine English (example: http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/494013.html )
• KyivPost (example: https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/eu-commissioner-bienkowska-visit-kyiv-march-27.html )

Comments

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

• Deutch Welle goes back and forth. Here's one from 22 March 2018 that uses Kiev. It depends on who is doing the writing for this media outlet. See Deutch Wells: Putin Re-elected: A Toxic Presidency? The other media source is RadioFreeEurope, and though backed by US money, it is specifically targeting Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Middle East where free press is minimal or at least of lesser quality. Since late 2017 it has used Kyiv exclusively. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
• What is needed to sway the opinion here is proof that Kyiv is now being used by a majority of major news outlets in English speaking countries, i.e. news outlets aimed at native English speakers... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:16, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

• Gentlemen, Fyunck(click) and Thomas.W, thank you your comments but this section is intended to just list the major English media outlets using Kyiv spelling. Not discuss how good/bad they are. Also, Fyunck(click), per your comment about DW English, I think they have a couple of editors who occasionally forget to spell it correctly, but the vast majority of editors now spell it Kyiv (e.g., Kyiv give 2029 search results, while Kiev gives 513 results, with nearly all of them before May 2017 (and only 2 after May 2017) )--Piznajko (talk) 14:34, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

• "Spell it correctly"? According to every English language dictionary, encyclopedia, and atlas I've used KIEV is the correct spelling. If you mean "the official transliteration", then say so. --Khajidha (talk) 15:10, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
• Also, define "major". --Khajidha (talk) 15:11, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

These first two sites are hardly "major" English-language media sites since they originate in non-English-speaking countries and target audiences that are English-speaking, but not living in English-speaking countries and not native speakers. They use English because English is the lingua franca of Europe. Deutsche Welle originates in Germany, RFE/RL originates in Prague. --Taivo (talk) 18:04, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@Piznajko: Ukrainian websites do not count, so there's no point in clogging up this talk page with them. What you need to provide is proof that a bunch of major news outlets in English speaking countries, such as BBC, CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, The Times and others, have switched to Kyiv. That's what counts, not websites/news outlets like the ones you have provided. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:23, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Thomas.W, I'm not trying to provide any proof or prove anything in any way. This is just a list of English language media that are popular and respectable and that switched to using Kyiv. That's it.--Piznajko (talk) 20:17, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@Piznajko: This is not a web host. If you want to keep a collection of links unrelated to any ongoing discussion please do that offsite. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:27, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

NeilN, I beg your pardon? The list of English-language media that switched to using Kyiv is relevant to this article in the sense showing where we stand in terms of the usage of this spelling in English-language media. You don't have a monopoly on this talk page, despite the fact that you're an admin on English Wikipedia.--Piznajko (talk) 00:28, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Can I have an opinion of a different enwiki admin here? I know you, admins, usually like to stick to each other, but I'm hoping for an impartial comment here. Am I dreaming, or is NeilN trying to bully me into removing the list I've created (that has a direct relevance to the article) by stating that, quote, there is no place for "a collection of links unrelated to any ongoing discussion" on Wikipedia talk page? Firstly, who said that a talk page comment has to be related to any ongoing discussion (e.g., what's wrong with writing on a talk page something related to the article itself, not any ongoing disscussion? - please direct me to a rule on Wiki that unequivocally states that enwiki talk pages are only for ongoing discussions (in case I've missed it) 2) secondly, the list I've created (and intend on updating) does have a degree of relevance to the ongoing discussion of naming the article because it helps with a quick overview of where we're in terms of the adoption of Kyiv spelling by English-language media.

ps. FYI, I originally posted this list on regulat article talk page, but TaivoLinguist has moved it here, I'm assuming cause he thought it was related to this discussion.--Piznajko (talk) 00:40, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Not an admin, but if you are "not trying to provide any proof or prove anything in any way" then there is nothing to talk about and no reason to post this. Talk pages are for discussing changes/improvements to the relevant articles. They should be relevant to an ongoing discussion or starting a new discussion. If you aren't trying to change the article, then this is just spam and should be deleted. --Khajidha (talk) 01:20, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Everything related to "Kiev" vs. "Kyiv" goes here. --Taivo (talk) 02:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

And the relevant policy is WP:SOAPBOXING--Ymblanter (talk) 07:29, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

@Softlavender, I specifically asked NOT to archive the list. I looked at WP:NOTAFORUM, WP:SOAPBOX, and WP:NOTWEBHOST rules that you referenced as your reasoning to delete it - I didn't see how any of these rules apply here. This list is RELEVENT to the article itself. None of the 3 rules quoted by you above said anything like "editors of enwiki are not allowed to post information relevant to the article on the talk page"; in fact, I belive talk pages were created for this very reason: so editors could post various information they consider relevant to the article.--Piznajko (talk) 18:27, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

If you don't see how those policies apply, then I seriously doubt that you have the intellectual capacity to edit here. --Khajidha (talk) 18:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@Piznajko: You've been repeatedly told that your collection of miscellaneous links here is totally irrelevant to the naming of the article, and why, and have also been told to do it the way it should be done, if you want to propose a change of name. So stop. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 18:41, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

And I've repeatedly said that the collection is NOT of miscellaneous links (it's a collection of names of English-language media) and that this link is relevant to the article and as such doesn't violate any existing rules of Wikipedia (nothing in the aforementioned WP:NOTAFORUM, WP:SOAPBOX, and WP:NOTWEBHOST said anything about not allowing an editor to post information relevant to the article on its talk page.--Piznajko (talk) 18:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Talk pages are for discussing proposed changes to the page. You claim not to be asking for a change, therefor this is just spam. --Khajidha (talk) 19:01, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's not up to you to decide if it's relevant or not, a whole bunch of other editors have said that it isn't, so it isn't... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:03, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.