Talk:Władysław III Spindleshanks: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:59, 12 June 2006

This template must be substituted. Replace {{Requested move ...}} with {{subst:Requested move ...}}.

Move request

The first name should be in English, not in Polish. This was a medieval monarch, no one cannot claim that Wladyslaw Spindleshanks is precisely his original name, spelling was not so established at that time. I chose Vladislaus instead of Ladislaus because it is more loyal to the Polish pronunciation. He was the high ksiaze, which could be expressed by "Grand Prince" - alternative would be for example "Duke of Cracow". Marrtel 18:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poll

Write Support or Oppose and an optional one-sentence reason. Longer parts of opinions then below at discussion.

Support. As nominator. Marrtel 18:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose So far I have seen the user opposes names based on opinion that they were made by "Polish nationalist minority"[1]. Such rude comments should be outside of wiki and certainly not a basis for changes.--Molobo 19:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, I think. Ksiaze is generally, as I understand it, translated as "Duke" for Polish rulers. (And I thought "Great Prince" was something along the lines of veliki ksiaze, rather than just ksiaze. I also don't like the latinization/pseudo-anglicization "Vladislaus". I'd prefer to use "Wladyslaw". john k 20:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Prefer Wladyslaw and not a king, per John K; what do the experts call him (Wladyslaw Laskonogi ?). Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No need to move; however, I'd prefer "Wladyslaw" if the name is changed. Dpv 20:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Who knows how to pronounce Władysław or Wladyslaw? I prefer the Latinisations and Anglicisations. No style need be included in the title: a fuller discussion must be had on the proper naming of the Polish overlords of the period of the Seniorate. Also, as to Molobo's comment above, while the notion of a "Polish cabal" and the accusations of "Polish nationalism" are less than good faith, I would say, it is not a good reason for voting against a proposal that the proponent has expressed such views. Srnec 20:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fairly weak support/Comment I support a move to the appropiate anglicization of the first name, i.e. Wladyslaw III, including whatever the appropriate title or designation is. Charles 21:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for above reasons, and this makes my list of 'really bad names' just below Wladyslaw II/V of Poland, Jogaila of Lithuania. Especially if we were to discuss his title (king? great prince? duke?) we should start this at talk and consider all possible variants, and not launch into a major renaming. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 * '''Support'''. As nominator. [[User:Marrtel|Marrtel]] 18:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
-**'''Oppose''' So far I have seen the user opposes names based on  opinion that they were made by "Polish nationalist minority"[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AW%C5%82adys%C5%82aw_II_Jagie%C5%82%C5%82o&diff=58254828&oldid=58249409]. Such rude comments should be outside of wiki and certainly not a basis for changes.
+*'''Oppose''' So far I have seen the user opposes names based on  opinion that they were made by "Polish nationalist minority"[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AW%C5%82adys%C5%82aw_II_Jagie%C5%82%C5%82o&diff=58254828&oldid=58249409]. Such rude comments should be outside of wiki and certainly not a basis for changes.--[[User:Molobo|Molobo]] 19:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
---[[User:Molobo|Molobo]] 19:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 *'''Oppose''', I think.  ''Ksiaze'' is generally, as I understand it, translated as "Duke" for Polish rulers.  (And I thought "Great Prince" was something along the lines of ''veliki ksiaze'', rather than just ''ksiaze''.  I also don't like the latinization/pseudo-anglicization "Vladislaus".  I'd prefer to use "Wladyslaw". [[User:John Kenney|john k]] 20:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 *'''Oppose''' Prefer Wladyslaw and not a king, per John K; what do the experts call him ([[Wladyslaw Laskonogi]] ?). [[User:Angusmclellan|Angus McLellan]]  [[User talk:Angusmclellan|(Talk)]] 20:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
@@ Line 16: / Line 15: @@
 *'''Comment'''. Who knows how to pronounce Władysław or Wladyslaw? I prefer the Latinisations and Anglicisations. No style need be included in the title: a fuller discussion must be had on the proper naming of the Polish overlords of the period of the Seniorate. Also, as to [[User:Molobo|Molobo]]'s comment above, while the notion of a "Polish cabal" and the accusations of "Polish nationalism" are less than good faith, I would say, it is not a good reason for voting against a proposal that the proponent has expressed such views. [[User:Srnec|Srnec]] 20:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 *'''Fairly weak support/Comment''' I support a move to the appropiate anglicization of the first name, i.e. Wladyslaw III, including whatever the appropriate title or designation is. [[User:Cfvh|Charles]] 21:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
+*'''Oppose''' for above reasons, and this makes my list of 'really bad names' just below [[Wladyslaw II/V of Poland, Jogaila of Lithuania]]. Especially if we were to discuss his title (king? great prince? duke?) we should start this at talk and consider all possible variants, and not launch into a major renaming. --[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]] <sup><font color="green">[[User_talk:Piotrus|Talk]]</font></sup> 21:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 ===Discussion===