Talk:Staryi Krym

Ukrainian name

Thanks for the name and the copyedit. I have put a redirect on Staryi Krym. If you feel that the article needs to be moved, do not forget to check for double redirects. The enciclopedias seems to use the form of Stary Crym, it is a kind of neutral, strict Russian transliteraion will be Stariy Krym. Thanks abakharev 08:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would there be any objection to moving this to Eski kırım? Tom e r ^talk 21:54, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In Tatar, it is Eski kırım, formerly Solhat, Solkhat, and Surhat. In some other language it's apparently Salaciq (presumably a Turkic language). Tom e r ^talk 23:53, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Additional info

I put these links here bcz they were what I came up with when I was planning to write Eski Kırım, of which I was planning to make a subsection called Solhat. They contain, cumulatively, quite a bit of information, but leave a lot of stuff out as well...for starters, I can't even find a map indicating where this place is! Tom e r ^talk 23:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation Date

Turkic name in the 6th cent.? the claim is dubitable

Ghirlandajo

First Turks in Crimea were Kutigurs and Utrigurs, who came to the peninsula in the 5-th cenrury. And at the end of the 6-th century eastern Crimea was a part of the Turkic Kaganate for a period of approximately 30 years. So, in the 6-th cent. Crimean steppes were alreay inhabited by Turkic-speaking peoples.

BUT! As far as I know, The city of Solkhat was founded only in the 13-th century, after the Mogol conquest.

Don Alessandro 19:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus. Please, keep discussing. —harej (talk) 20:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Staryi Krym → Eski Qırım — Name in the native local language (Crimean) of the most people living in. Riwnodennyk ✉ 13:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We don't decide article names on the basis of local majorities. What is this town called in English-language publications? Knepflerle (talk) 14:23, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eski Qırım barely appears in English publications, but Eski Krim appears to be a true English usage with a long, consistent history --- ~570 GBooks hits (look for "Etki Krim" or "Efki Krim" to find the 18th-century ones where GBooks OCR interpreted long s as "f" or "t"), vs. only ~370 for Stary Krym, 180 for Stary Krim, 117 for Staryi Krym, and 4 for Eski Qırım.

To make things even more confusing, "Old Crimea" also seems to have some usage, but I can't tell how much because Google "helpfully" ignores case and mixes it up with "old Crimea". cab (talk) 20:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think the Google Books search demonstrates merely that there is no true English usage. 570:370 is hardly indicative of there being any common English form at all. The proposed move opens up an argument about the names used for most Crimean settlements. I am not convinced that Crimean Tatar names have earned widespread acceptance in the English speaking world yet. Indeed, there are arguments raging on Wikipedia about whether Ukranian names have replaced the Russian form. What does the local city council refer to itself as in any English language material, if there is any? Skinsmoke (talk) 08:54, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Old Crimea", apparently: [1]. I agree that the balance of Eski Krim vs. Stariy Krym/variants thereof is not overwhelmingly in favour of the former. Anyway, purely in WP:NPOV terms, "Old Crimea" might be a better title than favouring either local language ... cab (talk) 13:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That ain't the site of the city council. For a start for those who don't read Russian, Ukrainian council websites use .ua, not narod.ru

We don't give much weight to official names anyway (see WP:OFFICIALNAMES), so I don't think this is a fruitful route to go down, but I'll continue to look for some sort of official municipal website.

It's also incorrect to frame this in terms of "NPOV" - we use what's used in English. We don't invent names even in the name of (perceived) "neutrality". Vladikavkaz has a majority of ethnic Ossetians and an Ossetian name (Дзæуджыхъæу), but we don't translate that name to "Ruler of the Caucasus" in the name of "neutrality". We instead use the widely-used English name, precisely because it is widely-used - not for any grounds of "POV" or "bias"

In the absence of a widely-used English name, use a standardised transcription of the name from the Cyrillic. Knepflerle (talk) 14:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I already pointed out above, the name "Old Crimea" in fact does have some usage in English. so your analogy to "Ruler of the Caucasus" is wrong. How much is hard to judge, but my eyeballing suggests it is roughly at the same order of magnitude as either "Eski Krim" or "Stary Krym" [2] (240 GBooks hits; but note that a lot of the hits on Eski Krim or Stary Krym aren't English). So we are no longer in WP:NC(CN) territory here ... cab (talk) 14:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're focusing on the details of the example I gave instead of the principle it was illustrating, you're missing the point. The "NPOV" argument is specious.

The Google Books search for "Old Crimea" contains as many, if not more, false positives - "Caswell was an old Crimea veteran", "standing in the vinery, our host gave us some old Crimea", "Let's see, was he an old Crimea man", "Sir John McNeill (an old Crimea hand)", "from which hung an old Crimea medal", "He was an old Crimea navvy", " looks to us like a reprint of an old Crimea book", "No one knew how old Crimea was" - and that's just the first page. That data has an incredibly low signal to noise ratio, and tells us practically nothing.

This is not a particularly unusual case - most settlements in the world have little-to-nothing written about them in English - and there's nothing you've said above that isn't covered in WP:NCGN. Indeed, the problems in the Google data are all foreseen and covered in WP:NCGN#Search_engine_issues.

I still don't yet see the evidence or argument for a predominantly-used English alternative to a simple standard transliteration. Knepflerle (talk) 17:50, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you say we don't care about official names, the actual language of the population, etc., what's the justification for picking any one of the three possible languages over any other, seeing as all of them have been used as the basis for how this place gets referred to in English? cab (talk) 18:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"We recommend choosing a single name, by some objective criterion, even a somewhat arbitrary one." - WP:NCGN
"It can happen that an otherwise notable topic has not yet received much attention in the English-speaking world, so that no established usage exists. If this happens, follow the conventions of the language in which the entity is most often talked about" - WP:UE

Any local name or transliteration thereof would be fine. We can pick any reasonable objective criterion to pick between them. Picking the Ukrainian name for a town in the Ukraine seems sensible enough, but other suggestions are welcome. Knepflerle (talk) 08:58, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Qirim "my hill"?

I removed the unsubstantiated claim that Qırım is from qır+ım, where -ım is supposedly a possessive suffix. I am willing to take people's word that this is how the name is etymologized in modern Crimean Tatar. But the name is not "Crimean Tatar", it is of 13th century Old Turkic coinage, and if there is a possessive suffix in there, I would prefer to be informed by a reference that is actually competent in Old Turkic etymology and states as much explicitly. --dab (𒁳) 13:48, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I now did some research on this, and it turns out that the "my hill" etymology was just made-up on-wiki WP:SYNTHESIS. --dab (𒁳) 10:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. There are a lot of Russian language sources that give such etymology, e.g. 1, 2. Besides in the Russian-language Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary the following etymology provided: "... Krym, according to Forster, means "fortress", and possible related to the Mongolian word "Kerm" - "wall" ... ".

Another dictionary states the following: "As city of Krym was fortified its name may originate from Mongolian "kherem" - "rampart, fortress wall". According to another version it comes from Crimean Tatar word "gyrym" - "moat", what is possibly because of the ancient moat in Perekop..."

Besides, as a little-speaker of that language I can say that it can come from "gır (as noun) +ım" - my steppe, but the version "gır (as a verb) + ım" - broken place, separated place, moat seems better, as earlier Tatars and Turks called the peninsula (erroneously) as "Crimean island".

If no objections, I'd want to add this info to the article. Bests, Ali-al-Bakuvi (talk) 18:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Stary Krym. 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) 21:30, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Names

The Names section has the statement, "Neither name is unattested prior to the 13th century ...". This makes little sense. It must be "Neither name is attested prior to the 13th century " Tachypaidia (talk) 01:08, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 2 reads: " An alternative proposal derives it [the name Krym] from the name of an Armenian monastic complex in Staryi Krym, built in 1338 and known in Armenian as "Surb Khach," Armenian: Սուրբ Խաչ or Holy Cross.[unreliable source?] Maksoudian, Krikor (1997).," et. al. As the use of the term Krym in the town dates from c. 1289 AD from coins struck there, the name cannot derive from the Armenian monastic complex constructed c. 50 years later. This note should be deleted. Tachypaidia (talk) 22:52, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily, unless we can show that a source is wrong or misinterpreted by us. Just because the earliest attestation of the name is a 1338 monastic complex doesn’t mean the name wasn’t in use for the location earlier, for example. Either or even both of the theories could still be true. —Michael Z. 18:15, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, the claim is that the city's name is derived from the name of the Armenian monastery built some 50 years later, specifically, because the monastery contains the word Խաչ = khach' = cross. Unless there is some source that the city or peninsula name derived from the Armenian word for "cross," citing this monastery as a source is fallacious. Tachypaidia (talk) 20:39, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]