Talk:Bolesław II the Bold

the Bold, the Cruel or the Generous?

Since it has been estabilished on Talk:Boleslaus_I_of_Poland#Move and Talk:List_of_Polish_monarchs#Naming to use Bolesław instead of Boleslaus, I will just test the three royal nicknames and list other without counting for redirect creation purposes:

Boleslaw II/Bolesław II (all 'B II's are a disambig)
Boleslav II - 1400
Boleslaus II - 526
- all 'B II's are a disambig so they don't caunt

Boleslaw II Smialy/Bolesław II Śmiały - 383
Boleslav II Smialy - 55
Boleslaus II Smialy - none
Boleslaw Smialy/Bolesław Śmiały - 1190
Boleslav Smialy - 22
Boleslaus Smialy - none

Boleslaw II Okrutny/Bolesław II Okrutny - 12
Boleslav II Okrutny - none
Boleslaus II Okrutny - none
Boleslaw Okrutny/Bolesław Okrutny - 8
Boleslav Okrutny - none
Boleslaus Okrutny - none

Boleslaw II Szczodry/Bolesław II Szczodry - 30
Boleslav II Szczodry - none
Boleslaus II Szczodry - none
Boleslaw Szczodry/Bolesław Szczodry - 20
Boleslav Szczodry - none
Boleslaus Szczodry - none

Boleslaw of Poland/Bolesław of Poland
Boleslav of Poland
Boleslaus of Poland
- those should be a disambig, see Talk:Boleslaus_I_of_Poland#Move for numbers

Boleslaw II of Poland/Bolesław II of Poland - 45
Boleslav II of Poland - 9
Boleslaus II of Poland - 1420
- 1500

Boleslaw the Bold/Bolesław the Bold - 381
Boleslav the Bold - 224
Boleslaus the Bold - 1330
Boleslaw II the Bold/Bolesław II the Bold - 265
Boleslav II the Bold - 89
Boleslaus II the Bold - 758
- 3000

Boleslaw the Cruel/Bolesław the Cruel - 44
Boleslav the Cruel - 141
Boleslaus the Cruel - 147
Boleslaw II the Cruel/Bolesław II the Cruel - none
Boleslav II the Cruel - none
Boleslaus II the Cruel - none
300

Boleslaw the Generous/Bolesław the Generous - 10
Boleslav the Generous - none
Boleslaus the Generous - 285
Boleslaw II the Generous/Bolesław II the Generous - 9
Boleslav II the Generous - none
Boleslaus II the Generous - 428
- 700

Although Boleslaus seems to be more popular then Bolesław (4200:2800), the difference is not that large, and for standarization I want to use Boleslaw (besides, it would be stupid to have Bolesław I the Brave and Boleslaus II the Bold, if they had the same first name, right?). The Bold beats the Cruel and the Generous easily (3000:300:700). Therefore if there are no objections, I'd like to move this to Bolesław II the Bold.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:40, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. 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 debate was no consensus. Haukur 16:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

Bolesław II the Bold to Boleslaus II of Poland. We do not use nicknames without extraordinary reasons. I propose the systematic name for this king. (He was one of the rarer monarchs of early period who was a recognized King). First name should be written in English, not in Polish. This was a medieval monarch, no one cannot claim that Boleslaw is precisely his original name spelling, spelling was not so established at that time. Marrtel 18:41, 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 18:42, 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 19:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The current title is bad, but I don't like the latinization/pseudo-anglicization "Boleslaus", which is not commonly used. john k 20:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- What are "pseudo-anglicizations"? AjaxSmack 03:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  A supposedly anglicized form which is actually a name not any more familiar to English speakers than the original name. Anglicizing "Jan" to "John" makes sense; anglicizing "Boleslaw" to "Boleslaus" doesn't so much. I've never met anyone named "Boleslaus". john k 10:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There's no need to change, but I'd prefer Bolesław II of Poland (or even Boleslaw II of Poland) to the proposal. Dpv 20:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The man is well known by his epithet, the Bold or Szczodry. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Boleslaus is a bad latinization, Bolesław is much more popular (see stats above). 'the Bold' is much more informative and popular then 'of Poland', see above stats too.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support/Comment I haven't been heavily involved on the use of cognomens in Wikipedia, especially with Polish monarchs, but I've seem very few instances of early monarchs with first names in one language and cognomens in the other. I support a move to the appropriate anglicization of the first name, seemingly Boselaw II of Poland. Charles 21:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. A tough one indeed. There is more than one "Boleslaus II" in history and there's no reason the Polish one reigns supreme. Therefore, a qualifier is needed on his name and ordinal. If a nickname, why not move Boleslav II of Bohemia to Bolselaus II the Pious? Or any other king to his nickname instead of "of Kingdom"? For consistency across Wikipedia, Boleslaus II of Poland is better than the current title and while there may be a better title than that, it has not really been propsed. Just because ordinals can be confusing does not mean we can always avoid them: see Guaimar III of Salerno and Guaimar IV of Salerno. Also, as to Molobo's comments, 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. And finally, I hope to have proded a discussion on the larger issue of Polish monarchic nomenclature in general at Talk:List of Polish monarchs. Srnec 02:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:Use English. AjaxSmack 03:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Polonising names in English Wikipedia without regard to the age is getting unhealthy. Then Lithuanian Jogaila gets the "most correct name" according to the Piotrus, Władysław II Jagiełło. Juraune 06:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. KonradWallenrod 07:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Piotrus and Co will never understand that this is no Polish wiki. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 12:47, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Orionus 12:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support It does say "use English" in the guidelines after all... Gryffindor 15:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'Weak support. The English is Boleslav. Septentrionalis 16:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support change to either Boleslav or Boleslaus as I have seen both used. Use English. Robert A.West (Talk) 19:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Use english, and not "Thomas à Becket" or similar creatures, as just corrected by me.--Matthead 22:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per other comments. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 00:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. logologist|Talk 01:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. -- Anatopism 03:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A wholesale systematic approach is needed, instead of separate votes on each individual monarch. - Mattergy 07:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Only because "Bolek" was not an option. I like Bolek and Lolek. Dr. Dan 13:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Radomil talk 15:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The name as it is currently spelled is acceptable to me, as it is reflective of usage in major English-language reference works. In 1979 Encyclopedia Britannica he's Bolesław II the Generous (with an "also known as" Bołeslaw II the Bold). Sokol's Polish Biographical Dictionary has him as Bolesław II (The Bold). Online Britannica has him as Boleslaw II, with bynames as Boleslaw the Bold and Boleslaw the Generous.[2] --Elonka 18:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Aldux 20:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support: use English. Jonathunder 07:10, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
SupportJay32183 18:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Remember, please, that he has three viable nicknames, not just "the Bold." Perhaps someday one of the other nicknames will surpass "the Bold" in usage, but he will still be "of Poland". Srnec 02:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Renamed

This has been too long in a location which clearly contravenes the naming convention. So, this needed a more NPOV place. In recent other polls, the general editorship has shown a clear support for "non-Polish" name versions. For starters, the recent name was not arrived by any consensus, but by a unilateral move, so its proponents are not entitled to claim their version the original or "lawful" one. The original was "Boleslaus II of Poland". I am not entirely happy with the location here, because I personally think the English form could be "Boleslaus". Because so many (Polish?) editors have expressed they are most unhappy with -laus endings, I swallowed my own preferences and chose a more Slavic-looking -lav here. Hope it satisfies at least some. If this is not a satisfactory place, be welcome to open a poll where this should be moved to. Then, I will vote for Boleslaus. Shilkanni 23:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the RM was to Boleslaus II of Poland, not Boleslav II of Poland, and that you should wait for the RM admin to recalculate the move and move the article, instead of moving it to the name that was not discussed in the RM but you feel is the best.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 02:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes boldness is a good thing. That said, the vote was 15-8 (including "weak" supports and excluding sockpuppets), if that's enough to legitimise a move, then the article ought to be moved to Boleslaus II of Poland. Srnec 21:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

Please note, that in the poll above,

are confirmed sockpuppets [3]. The outcome of the vote may change based on this information -- Chris 73 | Talk 22:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]