Jump to content

Talk:Kalemegdan Park

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kalemegdan Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:38, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great vs. Big vs. Greater?

[edit]

"Veliki" can be translated has any of the three terms, however I think there's substantial reason to believe that either of the two latter terms may be a more accurate translation. The terms "Veliki" and "Mali" are used in juxtaposition as opposites, in a similar way as "big" and "little" or "greater" and "lesser" would be used in English. Admittedly "Big Kalemegdan Park" and "Little Kalemegdan Park" sound somewhat silly in English in a way the terms in Serbian do not, so I'd personally tend towards "Greater Kalemegdan" and "Lesser Kalemegdan" as translations. The article doesn't actually cite any source for its translations, and my cursory search doesn't yield any authoritative sources. Any English results I've found which mention the split seem to be unofficial sources which quote this article verbatim, so it'd be nice if someone could either find a source with a more authoritative translation. Otherwise, the issue of the translation is something which should be resolved by consensus, hence opening this talk thread. Dimitriye98 (talk) 07:37, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]