Talk:Satu Mare County

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)

in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) page,

paragraph 2.

The lead: The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parenthesis: {name1, name2, name3, etc.}. Any archaic names in the list (including names used before the standardization of English orthography) should be clearly marked as such, i.e.: (name1 arch.). Relevant foreign language names[3] are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages, i.e.: (Armenian: name1, Belarusian: name2, Czech: name3). Alternatively, all alternative names can be moved to and explained in a names section immediately following the lead. In this case, the redundant list of the names in the article's first line should be replaced with the following text: (known also by several alternative namesNames). Once such a section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line.

Definition

^ The geographic location is considered to have a single widely accepted English name in modern context (swaEn) if the following two conditions are satisfied simultaneously: The English-language encyclopedias (Encyclopedia Britannica, Columbia Encyclopedia and Encarta) consistently use this name in all articles where the corresponding location is mentioned in modern context. This name obtains the largest number (75% or more of total hits considering all possible variants) of Google Scholar and Google Books hits (count only articles and books, not number of times the world is used in them) when searched over English language articles and books where the corresponding location is mentioned in modern context. If the name of the location coincides with the name of another entity, care should be taken to exclude inapropriate pages from the count.

internet hits returned 11.800 results of "Hargita county" and 154 000 results of "Harghita county". English encyclopedias consistently use the name "Harghita county"

there was a voting meant to settle this problem, concluded with 5 votes in favour of providing the HU names against 2. the relevancy of that vote is reduced to 7 people voting,

considering the relevancy of English Encyclopedias and Wikipedia naming conventions

i here by remove the names of hungarian administrative divisions provided as alternates for names of romanian administrative divisions from the lead of the article. refer to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) for any debate on this matter Criztu 08:16, 10 July 2006 (UTC)criztu

Maramures

Definetely not. Maramures is a historical region of the former KoH. Carei as a town of Maramures, must be kidding :) ... --fz22 21:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I personaly find this reference to historical regions useless, i would mention the current development region that Satu mare is assigned to. I may not be expert in the matter, but I know Maramures is a historical region of Romania. At least there is an informal region Maramures in Romania. Criztu 21:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, then. The Romanian Maramures is an 80 years old "historical" region ;). And what about Romanians living in outside Romania Maramures?. Sure, I know, Maramures is not a historical region of Ukrain ;) --fz22 21:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

There is a section called Historical regions of Romania. i dont see Partium listed there. I think Partium is a historical region of Hungary. but i cant find a Historical regions of Hungary. perhaps u should start that article Criztu 07:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Satu Mare county known as Szatmar

Satu Mare county was known as Szatmar is total mess. An administrative division of ROmania cant be known by the name of an administrative division of Kingdom of Hungary Criztu 18:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

A good point. I was only reverting unexplained deletions.

So, what was called "Szatmar"? The area? Is there a reference to the corresponding admin division of Kingdom of Hungary? `'mikka (t) 18:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, see the Szatmár article. —Khoikhoi 18:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Then please provide correct relation between the two terms, since they are not equivalent. `'mikka (t) 19:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The main issue is that Satu Mare County is 35.2% Hungarian, so as this seems like a sizeable Hungarian minority, I see no reason why we can't have the Hungarian name up there. Criztu seems to think that it makes it look like the county is not in Romania... —Khoikhoi 19:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Satu Mare administrative division is not "35%" hungarian and "65" romanian, it is entirely a political and administrative notion of a sovereign state Romania. Criztu 20:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way, while reverting I noticed it said is a county (judeţ) of Romania, in Maramureş, which looked like nonsence to me since Maramureş is yet another county. Then I noticed that Maramureş County article also says "Maramureşis a county (judeţ) of Romania, in Maramureş." But Maramureş is a redirect to Maramureş County. So what is it? Is Maramures also a historical region? If yes, please make an article, not a redirect, to prevent confusions. `'mikka (t) 19:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It's probably refering to Maramureş historical region. —Khoikhoi 19:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

So the phrase was false anyway, because it is written: "Its teritory now forms Maramureş County and parts of Satu Mare County;". Boyz, you are acusing me of making a mess while having mess everywhere yourselves. `'mikka (t) 19:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

How about the following sentence to be added?

"The significant ethnic minority of Hungarians refers to it as Szatmár, see also the Szatmár article."

`'mikka (t) 19:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but what part of the article? —Khoikhoi 19:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

"The significant ethnic minority of Hungarians refers to it as Szatmár, see also the Szatmár article." i am ok with this formulation, which is close to my formulation "Hungarian minority in Romania refers to it with the name Szatmár". I think mention to ethnic hungarian name fits best in the Demographic section, or where mention of a Hungarian minority living in that county comes naturaly. Providing information of the ethnicities living in an administrative divisions of ROmania in the lead section i would consider controversial. Criztu 20:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It is not information about ethnicities, it is information about name of the place. Still, I didn't receive a clarification: is it the official name of the county in Hungarian or just an informal reference, used historically? `'mikka (t) 20:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

officialy, the names are only Romanian. like, political maps of Romania display judetul (county) Satu Mare, not judetul Satu Mare / Szatmar . The hungarians refer to Satu Mare with the name Szatmar, as romanians refer to London with the name Londra Criztu 16:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, please check my changes in Maramureş. `'mikka (t) 20:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

(to Criztu) Not in the lead section? Forget it! The Hungarian name should not be hidden down below, it should be up at the top for everyone to see. You don't seem to have any problem with having the Romanian name at the top of the Hertsaivsky Raion article, but when it comes to Romania somehow it's sovereignty is at threat. —Khoikhoi 20:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I would not object if a ukrainian editor moves the romanian name of Hertza to the paragraph dealing with romanian minority, if the Hertza raion has no official romanian status within Ukraine Criztu 20:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The only official section in the article is the infobox. Inclusion of any other information in the rest of the article is judged by correctness of information only. `'mikka (t) 22:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree 100%. —Khoikhoi 22:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Within the framework of this discussion please answer my question in Talk:Hungarian minority in Romania#Official status of Hungarian language. `'mikka (t) 22:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

mikka, I'm a bit confused by your question in this edit summary. Szatmár is the Hungarian name of the county, Satu Mare is the Romanian name. They probably got the name from the city, which means "big village". —Khoikhoi 23:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Please read carefully the name of the article. `'mikka (t) 04:06, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

What for? I already know the Romanian name! —Khoikhoi 04:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Szatmár is the Hungarian name of the county. There is nothing complicated in this question, the only aim of this lawyering is obliterating a name used by Hungarians since the 13th century until nowadays. I won't accept the double standard that was created by Criztu's anti-Hungarian campaign about Transylvanian geographical names. There is no different policy for Romania - all over wikipedia minority names are mentioned in the lead. Criztu should try to erase all the alternative names on this encyclopaedia (thousends of them) or accept the fact that there are other, non-official names for Romanian geographical and administrative units. Zello 00:22, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Please stop politicizing the issue and write the correct translation of the term. `'mikka (t) 04:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

It's Szatmár. What do you mean "the correct translation of the term"? —Khoikhoi 04:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Sigh. What's wrong with you guys? The title of the article is "Satu Mare County" COUNTY!!!!. Which syllable of the word "szatmar" is translated as "county"? I don't know hungarian and I had to waste my time to find that it probably must have something like "megye"? Something like hu:Fejér megye? I repeatedly asked the official term, not what some magyar villager utters in a czarda. So, all clues spelt for you like for first graders, for the last time: what is the correct term, dammit? `'mikka (t) 05:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

LOL, chill mikka! :p You're right, it can either be "Szatmár megye" or "Szatmár vármegye" (oops, I guess that's the name used duing the Kingdom of Hungary, the modern name appears to be the first one, "Szatmár megye"). Does that help? —Khoikhoi 06:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The thing is, I'm not sure why you want the "official name", as Romania only has 1 official language. Why isn't the name that Hungarians call it good enough? —Khoikhoi 06:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

While Romanian is the only one official statewise, in a number of states there are additional languages in official use in national regions. Therefore I posted a question inTalk:Hungarian_minority_in_Romania#Official_status_of_Hungarian_language, but I don't see people rushing to update this article. Why I want the "offic name"? If it has a measure of officiality in Satu Mare, then this discussion is closed for good. If not, we will still have to work out the way to satisfy political sensitivities.

Meanwhile, don't feed trolls.`'mikka (t) 01:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Ronline said "for localities where a minority makes up more than 20% of the population, that language must be placed in the infobox alongside the Romanian name, and it must definitely be mentioned in the lead". That sounds like a pretty good answer to me. BTW, how am I feeding Bonaparte? By reverting him? —Khoikhoi 02:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

By talking to him. `'mikka (t) 03:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, sorry about that. —Khoikhoi 04:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

mikka, please see this comment by Dahn:

I note that Criztu has let a spurious conclusion pass into acceptance, an I need to stress what precisely is bogus in one claim of his. County X in Romania has name Y in Hungarian; we happen to note that name Y was also used by a county (indeed, with separate borders etc.) during the time when Transylvania was part of Hungary. Please note that counties in Hungary with names that fall into category Y have separate pages (you may find them in Category:Kingdom of Hungary counties in Transylvania). All of this adds does not contradict the simple and obvious fact that the present-day counties have names in Hungarian: simply because Hungarian-speakers do not switch to Romanian when they have to use the name of the county in plain conversation!). Thus, the Hungarian name of the county is a present-day reference, and not a reference to the Hungarian counties of yesteryear! To the notion that "they should not be used because thay are not official, I answer by joining my message with the 1,000 posts that have made it clear why this is by no means a rule as long as the name's use is relevant (see the alternative names provided for the French region of Bretagne and other millions of articles out there - in case this is not clear, I quote from the Breton language article: "Breton is not an official language of France", with the same officially-sanctioned level of bilingualism: " the regional and departmental authorities do use Breton to a very limited extent insofar as they feel able, for example in signage"). This has gone far enough.

Also, the mediator has noted that it finding the connection between, say, Harghita and Csik is difficult. It certainly is. The articles certainly need some sort of History section, and a link to the former administrative units (with explanations of administrative changes in-between). As it is, I have tried to make this relevant connection available in at least one point: the Transylvania page, where I had provided a link to the counties of Hungary. Let's see if you guess who started a mediation against me for "POV"... why, the very person who requested this one! I ask meditors not to give in to an attempt of obscuring relevant data. I consider this the very first requirement to finally getting a move on cleaning up, turning relevant, and making accurate and non-partisan all Transylvania-related articles. We have an opportunity to reach a consensus on what is factual, not on what is symbolic: as a Romanian, I aim to help along in bringing these pages to a higher level of quality and to indisputable accuracy, with focus on what the reader may wish to know, not on localist arguments of zero quality (be they Romanian or Hungarian).

—Khoikhoi 20:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Szatmár megye - that is the name of the county in Hungarian. Please restore the lead then, Mikka Zello 21:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I dont think u understand what is an alternative name in an english encyclopedia. An alternative name would be a name that would be employed in english sources. as i gave the example of city London, that 22 milion romanians refer to London with the name Londra does not make Londra an alternative name in english encyclopedia for London. That the hungarians refer to Satu Mare county with the name Szatmar does not make Szatmar an alternative name of Satu mare. the name Szatmar would aquire relevance for the lead section if it would be a legacy name, like the names of cities in Romania that were before 1918 cities of Austria-Hungary, and significant documents in english refered to them by their Austro-Hungarian name. which is not the case with the administrative divisions of Romania. Criztu 15:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

London is not a good example, since 1) as far as I know, it doesn't have a significant Romanian population; 2) cities that are known worldwide usually have names in every language and having each one of them mentioned in the first paragraph would make it too long. But if a city/county/any other thing has names in only a few languages, it can be mentioned in the first sentence without making it too long. (The first sentence of Pécs mentions seven alternative names including Latin. The city, of course, doesn't have a big Latin-speaking community.)

Many Hungarian cities and counties (even city parts and villages) mention foreign names.

“Békéscsaba (Slovak: Békešská Čaba; Romanian: Bichişciaba) is a city in Southeast Hungary” (note: population: 6% Slovak, 0,4% Romanian)

“Békés county (Hungarian: Békés megye; Romanian: judeţul Bichiş; Slovak: Békešská župa) is an administrative division in south-eastern Hungary” (1,7% Slovak, 1,02% Romanian)

“Miskolc (in Slovak Miškovec, in Polish Miszkolc)” (0,3% Slovaks, not too many Polish)

As you can see, we include foreign names even where the population of that minority is not even close to 35%. Why can't you just accept that minority names should be used, without feeling all defensive and nationalistic? European cities and adm. divisions had various names throughou history, mentioning all of them does no harm, it just reflects on their rich history. As a matter of fact, I even like it when foreign names are used in Hungary-related articles, because it makes them seem more internationally known & multicultural :)

– Alensha  ^talk 12:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I am not nationalistic nor defensive. I agree the names of cities in Romania that were administrated by Kgdom of Hungary can have the name in Hungarian in the lead section, as there are english sources(like until 1918-1920) using the Hungarian name of that city. But there is no english source using a hungarian name for an administrative division of Romania, which administrative divisions where never administrated by Hungary Criztu 18:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Very good. Now Wikipedia is an English source for this (correct and verifiable) infromation. It means that Wikipedia is better than Encycloipedia Britannica. `'mikka (t) 18:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

When there will be a wikiarticle titled Szatmar county, then will Wikipedia be an english source. Until then, Wikipedia will only provide a hungarian name for a place in Romania, equivalent with providing a hungarian name for London. Criztu 18:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It lies in the historical region XXX

Instead this we should add a history section where we could put this in perspecive. Something like this:

• - 1920 constituent part of former Szatmár
• 1920 - 1940 absorbed in Maramures region
• 1940 - 1947 Szatmár was reorganised
• 1947 - 1952
• 1952 - 1960 absorbed in Baia Mare region
• 1960 - 1968 absorbed in Maramures region
• 1968 - Satu Mare county was reorganised ... etc etc --fz22 21:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

As for the lead I think Partium is better. What you proposed is the list of administrative changes in the 20th century - of course that is an important element of the history section. But the perception of historical regions don't follow such administrative changes and Partium remained a "living" region, at least among Hungarians. Zello 23:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right, Partium is still a living region, among Hungarians.

I think Romanians use the expression Crişana, so this should be mentioned at the first place. But it's better to leave this for a Romanian user who knows better the Romanian regions. Zello 00:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No they don't. They think Satu Mare belongs to Maramures region, which is non sense IMO (+ my wife - born in Satu Mare - holds with this). I think they simple confuse the historical region of the Carpathian Basin (KoH) with the Maramures "region" (an administrative unit formed after 1920, and 1960) --fz22 08:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Maramureş historical region bogdan 09:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure but the pre-1920 historical region Maramures does not corespond to that Maramureş historical region ... --fz22 10:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

There is no historical region of Romania named Partium. Either Satu mare is situated in Maramures in ROmania, either Satu mare is situated in Romania, it can not be situated in a historicala region of Hungary when it is an administrative division of Romania Criztu 14:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

A historical region is not an official administratic district, so it doesn't need any official recognizement. It depends only on the people living there. Partium is an existing region for the Hungarian speaking citizens of present-day Romania. Zello 16:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

An administrative region is located inside a state. You can add in the History section that the territory of that administrative division was part of another state, or part of a historic region. An administrative division of Romania is not situated in a historical region of Hungary, at best it is located in a historical region of Romania. As i think it is exaggerated to mentain that the teritory of an administrative division of Romania is located in a historical region, i removed mention of Historical regions in the lead. If you intent on making a History paragraph in the article, you can provide information of historical regions there Criztu 17:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Partium is a historical region of Romania not of Hungary because a lot of Romanian citizens think so. The fact that they are Hungarians by ethnicity didn't mean anything in that question. You deliberately mix Hungarian people and Hungary as a state as if no Hungarians were living in Romania. If Hungarian-speaking Romanian citizens consider a territory a historical region that historical region exists until the Hungarian minority living there exists too. Zello 17:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

propaganda

I will explain my perception on the convention of Britannica about lead section, and what i consider it is being done to the articles about Administrative divisions of Romania on Wikipedia

Britannica (as i assume it is safely a standard in encyclopedias) says the following about Satu Mare county (judet): Satu Mare judet (county), northwestern Romania. . So it offers the official name of Satu Mare county, and a Romanian word for county, judet. this means it is a thing of Romania. Britannica does the same with counties of Hungary : Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg megye (county), extreme northeastern Hungary, the official name of Szatmar and the Hungarian word for county, megye. this means it is a thing of Hungary.

what i think an editor formulating a Satu Mare County (IPA: ['sa.tu 'ma.re], Romanian: Judeţul Satu Mare, Hungarian: Szatmár megye) is a county (judeţ) of Romania. It lies in the historical regions Maramureş or Partium. The capital city is Satu Mare. Satu Mare features a significant ethnic minority of Hungarians. does is propagating a "hungaricity" of a teritory of Romania.

In my view, anything pertaining to ethnicity of a teritory that does not have a status related to that ethnicity belongs to Demographics of the article. Criztu 17:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

That means only that wikipedia gives more information and became already more useful than Britannica. Zello 17:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

if u put information about ethnicity of the population in Demographics section then yes, that information is useful, if u put information about ethnicity of the population in the Lead section then you are making Propaganda Criztu 18:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

That's only your opinion not a rule or an official wikipedia guideline. Zello 19:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

it is my opinnion yes, and I will stick to the formulation of Britannica, and move information about ethnicity to Demographics. I read in the Wikipedia Naming Convention geographical names, that a Guide to settle the use of alternative names in lead section is under development, there are a few elements there that might solve this whole problem, i invite u to study that guide also Criztu 19:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I won't be a partner in the lawyering, I know wikipedia customs and alternative names are accepted everywhere here. Your chauvinistic anti-Hungarian campaign won't be better from the fake legal arguments, everybody see your real goals. I will revert the article but not now as you broke the 3RR and I won't do the same. Zello 20:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Satu Mare county model

I think the Lead section of Satu Mare can lead to a formulation that would make the Lead NPOV. The fact Satu Mare has a significant hungarian minority could be considered a relevant feature for this county, and others like it. I think mentioning the Hungarian minority in the lead is NPOV and relevant, and will make the mention to the name by which hungarians refer to this county natural. I would formulate Satu Mare county of Romania, capital Satu Mare. The county has a significant Hungarian minority. Hungarians refer to Satu Mare with the name Szatmar. Thus providing the name by which Hungarians refer to the county does not have the weight of an alternative name in english sources. Criztu 18:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

There is no different Satu Mare County model - wikipedia always mentions the minority language names in brackets and in italic as countless examples prove. This is the custom and the wikipedia model. Zello 23:09, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I also think the idea of an "alternative name in English sources" is a misinterpretation of policy. The alternative names convention is that, for toponyms, names in relevant foreign languages should be mentioned in the lead. This relevance is measured generally either by 1) the presence of a sizeable minority, 2) historical significance. If the toponym has an English name (i.e. Bucharest), then the native name should also be listed in the brackets, not because it's an alternative name "in English sources", but because it's the native name. Ronline ✉ 08:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

the policy in providing alternative names in the lead section is ambiguous. This is what Wikipedia: Naming convention says about "a relevant foreign language name" "^ A relevant foreign language name is the one used by at least 10% of sources in English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place." Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) Criztu 15:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, so now it is "ambiguous"... Dahn 15:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Satu Mare County. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090816034908/http://www.recensamant.ro/pagini/tabele/t40a.pdf to http://www.recensamant.ro/pagini/tabele/t40a.pdf

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) 05:41, 9 December 2017 (UTC)