Talk:Árva County

Untitled

Almost all time of existention of this comitatus was official name "Comitatus Arvensis" Name was changed in the time of magyarization. Its good to change name to be historicaly correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samofi (talk • contribs) 20:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Recent attemtps to remove Hungarian names

Unfortunately the subject is forced by a second revert, with a clear aim avoiding good faith or fair review. Thus I have to announce here there is no consensus for the latest reverts and edit about the removal of Hungarian names.

WP:English or WP:Naming conventions were not harmed, no objection may be raised for the former state of the article, where all English and Slovak names were present where it is relevant. After a long experience about contemporary/historical naming conventions, I have almost never met such case the correspondent unser introduced here, unless it was a clear anti-Hungarian aim to get rid of anything that may be Hungarian in an article. This users persist a trick and confusing the medieval administration - that existed only paper, never in practice or the common langauge of the Modern Era's official language status, that is a totally different concept.

Surprisingly, in any article the correspodent in the country's name and language can be used in the first place in the medieval times, surprisingly only some people want to get rid of the Hungarian, may I ask, will this mean that more thousand articles and more ten-thousand names will be rewritten in Latin and Slavic - the two major administration in countries, and no Engish, German, Italian, Spanish, French, Hungarian, Romanian names may be ever indicated?

Of course, with a little experience it is clear when how we have to do, since the article's context is also very important. If there is a historical English name, it can be used in the first place, if not, the contemporary country's name can be used in the first place - and it don't have to be written in Latin phonetics, that is most of the time the phonetic transcript of the originally used name - after, the modern-day max be indicated in brackets - most of the cases the English names are identical of the present-day native names. If it is about a modern era, were strictly and official langauge was introduced in a completely different terms and usage unlike the medieval times, that may be used in the fisrt place. If the context is releavant to an i.e. historical person from a different ethnicity - like a Saxon in Transylvania - i.e. the German names may be used in the first place despite they were not official, similarly in any other cases, etc.

This article is about mainly a comitatus of Hungary, a historical region for a long time inHungary thus the ignorance of the Hungarian names are not just against the contemporary naming conventions, but are totally outreagous as i.e. like the Romanian names would be ignored regarding the historical Moldavia, or German would be ingnored in Bavaria, etc. Also it has to be taken into account that article's series is highlighting that comitatus that existed anyway when Hungarian was also the official language, since there are also other articles about eralier counties, nota bene.

The article has an other section, a shorter one when it is about the period of Czeshoslovakia, of course noone want's to exile Czech or Slovak names anywhere.

Sharply:

- the historical comitatus' of Hungary have Hungarian names, and the English names are not Slovak or anything else

- the river names were indicated in all languges, thus the removal of the Hungarian name is a clear demonstration of an anti-Hungarian aim

- all other cities, villages were indicated in all langauges, thus the removal of the Hungarian name is a clear demonstration of an anti-Hungarian aim

- Removing (Hungarian Árva vára), the historical reference of the Orava castle, however, the English-Slovak name was presented in the first place is again a proof of an an anti-Hungarian aim

- no problem if we add more version of the names used in the relevant timeline, but the current situation is inacceptable and incorrect, if a new consensus is wanted regarding this article, first it has to be built!(KIENGIR (talk) 23:57, 12 October 2016 (UTC))

Shortly

- Bratislava before 1919 -> Pressburg, the widely accepted historical English name (not Pozsony as you changed in other article)

- Veličná in the context of longer historical period -> Veličná (other names), because there is not any widely accepted historical English name and the name had changed over the time. Particularly, if we speak about the 16th century it was not called "Nagyfalu" even in Hungarian

- Veličná in 1844-1918 -> Nagyfalu (other names), because there is not any widely accepted historical English name, Nagyfalu was the official name (Hungarian was the official language).

- Orava (river) -> Orava river, like High Tatras are High Tatras and not "Magas-Tátra (High Tatras, Veľké Tatry)", the widely accepted English geographic name.

- I don't think that mentioning every single name is the best way how to do things. Veličná (Template:Lang-hu) is OK, but a detailed list including Magna Villa, Welkeg Wsy, Veľké Vsy, Naghffalva, etc, etc belogs to Veličná->Names not to the general article.

- Here is the original [diff] made by you and reverted by me. Which names in which language were removed? I did not revert anything else. Ditinili (talk) 06:51, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

- The Pressburg cases are not under debate this article, however I consider in a relevant context - i.e. - official Hungarian capital to be mentioned, but this is not the subject here, I acknowledge the well-established and accepted English name status of "Pressburg".

- Not true, "Nagyfalu" is dated from 1420, anyway the original latin name was also the translation of the Hungarian name, so I support here Nagyfalu (and any other version in brackets you wish)

- OK

- I would accept "Orava river (Hungarian: Árva)" version since the section is designating the territory of the comitatus, as historical region of Hungary as well the period of the modern-era. In this case, the English-Slovak name would be in the first place, and the Hungarian name in brackets. High Tatras was not debated.

- this I let you to decide on your own, which version you consider relevant in the brackets in case Hungarian is in the first place - about particularly Veličná see above

- Not that edit was reverted by you, a latter one. Names: Árva, Zázriva, Árva vára, Nagyfalu, Alsókubin. Language: Hungarian.(KIENGIR (talk) 01:41, 14 October 2016 (UTC))

Kiengir, you systematically hid any modern English (or historical Slovak name) and then accused me from "anti-Hungarian aims" (as it is clear from the [diff]). This is very, very strange and unusual behavior.

Now, about the names:

- The opinion that Magna Villa is "the translation of the Hungarian name" is an unsourced speculation, because the first Hungarian name is recorded only 148 years later and not as Nagyfalu (what is the modern or later Hungarian name) but Nag Flaw.

- No matter how, the village is historically known under various names and we cannot prefer some of them just to make somebody (whoever) satisfied, but it should be done systematically. If the Hungarian language a) had no special position in 15-16th century in the town or in the region b) it was not an administrative language nor spoken by the majority population c) the town is known under various very different local names and d) there is not any widely accepted historic English name, then we should use "modern name (other names)". This is completely neutral, non-conflicting and apolitical approach compliant with all Wikipedia standards.

- The dependency on the "original etymology" as a "naming convention" has no support in Wikipedia rules. I think that this is a non-standard and poor approach. Etymology is often unclear, it will only raise new discussions and conflicts and in many cases the name is Quadi and not Slovak or Hungarian. Note, that it does not support your naming by the modern Hungarian names, e.g. Kubín is "kublin" (archaic Slovak: a smoked glade) and is documented (also before the Hungarian language became the official language) as Nizny Kubin and Dolny Kubin.

"Orava river (Hungarian: Árva)" is not necessary, but I am fine with it.I am not OK with Kis-Fátra/Nagy-Fátra instead of Lower Fatra, Lesser Fatra or Malá Fatra and similar exclusively Hungarian names as they are used in several related articles (see e.g. Turóc County).

P.S.: If you look e.g. on [this English map from 1833], Dolný Kubín in not Alsókubin but Kubini, Ružomberok is not Rózsahegy but Rosenberg, Kysucké Nové Mesto is not Kiszucaújhely but Novemeste, Trstená is not Trsztena but Terstina, Mníchova Lehota is not Barátszabadi but Mnichova, Trnava is not Nagyszombat but Trnau, etc, etc, like Bratislava is not Pozsony but Presburg. So, the usage of historical/later/modern Hungarian names in English Wikipedia (as it is applied now - in general and for every cost) is more than questionable.Ditinili (talk) 10:20, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Dear Ditinili.

-you ride on an old diff that was shortly overriden, since the article is part of the classical modern comitatus's of Kingdom of Hungary that has mainly a period with undebated Hungarian official language status and Hungarian context, it would have been also applicable that only the reference remains to English/Slovaks names, but an other editor warned me, we discussed explicitly about the question and after our deal also English/Slovak names were also shown.

- :) We have all the list of the latin names and systematically you see the pattern that mainly the two type of transcription and transliteration from Hungarian to Latin exists: 1. transcription of the Hungarian name with Latin phonetics 2. Transliterating the word. So it is not a "speculation", everyone knows who dealt with this topic. Anyway it does not matter here since the relevant timeline when it is mentioned already the Hungarian-Hungarian name was also referred, I think you surely wanted to be funny if "Nagfalw" could not be written or would not be equal with Nagyfalu... However, in 1487 it is mentioned already as "Nagyfalu" so we have not any problem here anymore....

- well, if would add also if the article and/or the context is about Hungary or related to Hungary or the Hungarian state then at least that Hungarian version should be indicated in the first place that was used that time, and of course also higlighting other important names along with the present-day name

- there is no debate many Hungarian names have Slavic origin, so I have no problem to put on the first place i.e. "Cublyn" or "Kublin" or similar in the relevant timeline and after in brackets the Hungarian and Slovak contemporary name, followed the present-day name. I put in Túróc the English names for the mountains, if you have further wishes please let me know

- I have no problem i.e., as mentioned above to use "Kubini" and after in brackets Hungarian, Slovak and present-day name.(KIENGIR (talk) 23:52, 14 October 2016 (UTC))