Jump to content

Talk:Pokuttia–Bukovina dialect

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Requested move 23 March 2021

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.

Moved as proposed. After much-extended time for discussion, there is a consensus for the proposed move. BD2412 T 23:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pokutia-Bukovyna dialect → Pokuttia-Bukovina dialect – "Pokutia" and "Bukovyna" are litteral transliterations from Ukrainian. It is not used by reliable sources, only by mirrors of Wikipedia. Also, Pokuttya and Bukovina fit the titles of the articles of these two regions. Super Ψ Dro 15:25, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It seems to me like your proposed term is the much more common (although I would await answers from other users as well), but I do think that the article should be moved. Åttiotrean 226 ☭ 15:39, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Let’s stop and think about this. A quick look at Google Books Ngram shows that there are at least three common spellings, and Pokuttya was uncommon before the Wikipedia era.[1] WP:UKR suggests we use Pokuttia if there isn’t one clear WP:COMMONNAME.
Bukovyna is certainly used by reliable sources, and it may be the more appropriate spelling in a Ukrainian context. Let me check some sources. In the meantime, since this is a specialized subject, also look at G. scholar results.[2][3]
Ukrainian Wikipedia tells us this is also called nadpruts’kyi hovir; is that the same as Upper Prutian? —Michael Z. 20:56, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter if only recently Pokuttya has recently become the most common term, that's enough for Wikipedia. An example is Kyiv. Kiev is used in many more sources than Kyiv, but as the latter is becoming more popular (becoming, it isn't even yet the most), it was decided to move the article. Also, it appears that Pokuttya is the standard name for the region on Wikipedia. If this is untrue, further discussion would be needed in other articles too, but until then, WP:CONSISTENT with the article of Pokuttya may be a reason to justify this move.
I find Bukovyna even more inappropriate. Pokuttya at least is in Ukraine, but Bukovina is a region divided between Ukraine and Romania, and in the latter there are Ukrainians speaking this dialect, which invalidates the Ukrainian context. Also, articles related to the Romanian part of Bukovina do not use the Romanian name, Bucovina, but the English one, Bukovina. And it seems that there are results in Google Scholar with both names, my bad, I made the search with the hyphen.
I don't know anything of Ukrainian, so I can't help much with the last thing. Super Ψ Dro 22:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn’t write that Pokuttya became the most common spelling, recently or at any time. I don’t believe it did. Do you have evidence it did?
Bukovyna and Bukovina are both English spellings.
As to the common name of the subject of this article, in subject-specific reliable, English-language sources:
Did you actually look at WP:CONSISTENT? It says to use consistent patterns, not the use of same spellings everywhere. An inconsistent pattern is, for example Motolian dialect with an adjective and not Motol dialect, but Pokutia-Bukovyna dialect with a compound noun (and an incorrect hyphen for a dash) and not Pokutian–Bukovynian dialect. —Michael Z. 01:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
After a tiny bit of research I decided that article is at the wrong title, and posted a formal move request at talk:Pokuttya#Requested move 27 March 2021. I suggest that we leave this RM open until after that one is resolved, but I won’t object if we don’t. —Michael Z. 03:48, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I supported your nomination there as you seem to be right. I changed the proposed name of this RM to that spelling. In the meantime we can discuss Bukovina's name. This version is much more common than the Ukrainian (Romanian is in fact also slighly more used than the Ukrainian one) [4]. For Pokuttia there does not seem to have been a common established name, but Bukovina is clearly the most used. Super Ψ Dro 09:21, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are several precedents for using alternate names in different contexts, and I still think that (and also therefore) we should consider what is the most common spelling used for this subject, whose geographical context is northern Bukovyna chiefly in Ukraine, ethnocultural context is Ukrainian, and historical context overlaps the existence of political states with capitals in Vienna, Budapest, Moscow, and Kyiv, but actually predates most of them. Look at matching searches with the Romanian root Bucovina (14 results), Hungarian and Slovak Bukovina (35), Ukrainian Bukovyna (5), and German and Polish Bukowina (586, but many in other places). There are valid titles with each spelling, so none is unacceptable where it is appropriate. If we choose a non-Ukrainian spelling for a Ukrainian subject, let’s make sure it is because the guideline dictates it and not because of a WP:BIAS. —Michael Z. 14:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get the point you're trying to make. "Bukovina" is supported by WP:COMMONNAME ("However, some topics have multiple names, and some names have multiple topics; this can lead to disagreement about which name should be used for a given article's title. Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used"). Google Ngram clearly shows that among the four spellings you mentioned, Bukovina is the predominant one. Also, note that we do not use region names based on their historical context. We say Duchy of Bukovina and Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria, not Duchy of Bukowina or Kingdom of Galizien and Lodomerien. This of course excludes topics such as companies (like Bukovyna Airlines or Bukovyna Stadium) since they have a proper name that is the way it is, but dialects do not have unchangeable proper names and that is why we should opt for the most common name. Super Ψ Dro 17:07, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t think those premises and logic are sound. It sounds like you mean this article should include the spelling Bukovina because that spelling is always the only right one, and then you point out the exceptions and say they don’t count because of some reasons that come from I don’t know where. “Dialects do not have unchangeable proper names.” Says who? And what is an “unchangeable” name?—all names of all things are changeable. The “companies,” an airline company, a soccer team, and a stadium, are all just named directly after the region. The Airline uses the Latin spelling Bukovyna, but do the others? We romanize them from the Ukrainian name because they are in a Ukrainian context and that is the way it is done these days. I’m sure a decade or two ago consensus would have called them Bukovina Stadium or Bukovinian Stadium.
And you cite commonname as applied to the article “Bukovina,” and then imply that that affects all articles that contain the name (except for the aformentioned non-exceptioning exceptions), but I don’t think that’s what commonname says. It says title this article by the most common name of this thing. So let’s test it. The names Pokuttia-Bukovina dialect and Pokuttia-Bukovyna dialect are too low-frequency to return a Google Books Ngram chart. Scholar has exactly five results for Pokuttia-Bukovyna dialect(s) and none for Pokuttia-Bukovina dialect(s). They are so low frequency that Google Advanced Book search removes the quotation marks when you page through search results, and so I suggest the 520 to 500 advantage, or 4 percent difference, is probably meaningless. I think this is too rare and specialized to gauge properly by WP:SET, but if you trust those numbers, then you would conclude that Pokuttia-Bukovina dialect is not the sole commonly used English name.
So let’s go by subject-specific sources to determine the common name, if there is one. I mentioned some above, and will try to bring back some more, possibly including other versions of the name. If we can’t agree they indicate a most common name, then we can fall back on using the original name, which in this case is Ukrainian покутсько-буковинський говір, pokutsko-bukovynskyi hovir, literally “Pokuttian–Bukovynian dialect.” I don’t agree that only momentary current usage matters and past usage can be disregarded, but in this case, with romanization practices changing in the last decade, I think we should definitely give weight to more recent sources. —Michael Z. 19:42, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will reply once you bring those sources, then. Super Ψ Dro 19:56, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, the name of the Duchy and other places is precisely “based on their historical context.” The region was ruled by Austria, Austro-Hungary, and then Moscow. GB Ngram shows English usage transitioned from a German spelling to a Hungarian and Russian-derived one. Ironic that you are working so hard to apply a colonial exonym spelling of an indigenous Ukrainian name used for dialects of Ukrainian in Ukraine, while disqualifying the Ukrainian-derived spelling that also sees use for vague reasons that don’t mention our guidelines. Please check your WP:BIAS. —Michael Z. 20:21, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was obviously talking about their name in Wikipedia, not in historical sources. I linked those pages for a reason. I don't understand why I would be interested in supporting a "colonial" Hungarian and Russian name, the only thing I'm doing is supporting the standard and most used English name for the region. Please stop with your bias accusations, if I really was biased, both Bukovina-related pages that I created (Bukovina Day and Bukovina Governorate) would now have a C instead of a K. In fact, I find your way of speaking more aggressive than mine, judging that this is the second bias accusation you make. So let's leave the accusations and focus on the real matter. Oh, and for your information, Bukovinian Romanian dialect does not use "Bucovina" but "Bukovina", so it would just make sense for the Ukrainian dialect of the region to also use the English name. Super Ψ Dro 20:44, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for giving you the wrong impression. That’s not any accusation, since we all inherently have our biases, just a reminder to be aware of the important essay for editors (I hope you’ve read it). But I don’t know why you keep insisting that one spelling is “standard,” and “English,” as if it were unique and privileged by those qualities. It is not, by either. That is demonstrated by usage of other English spellings that I have cited above, and by the absence of an actual standard. And I’ll also remind you, again, we are discussing the title for this article about Ukrainian language, not about the “English name for the region.” I don’t want to rename the article about the region. Let’s please agree on the most commonly used English name for the group of dialects. —Michael Z. 00:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem then, sorry for escalating a bit. You are correct that Bukovina is not the only valid way of referring to the region, but it is the most used by Wikipedia, that is why I say that it is standard and that it is the "English name" of the region. Although I understand your point from the geographical context, I think that the name most used in Wikipedia for this region should be used for this dialect. Super Ψ Dro 11:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can we agree on a consensus for the spelling Pokuttia, especially after the successful RM of talk:Pokuttia#Requested move 27 March 2021? Let’s just move this to Pokuttia-Bukovyna dialect now, and relist this as a new RM. The rebooted discussion will be easier for other editors to follow and vote yes or no on. I’m not just trying to short-circuit this for my preferred name, as I do believe both versions have merits, and either would be acceptable. But otherwise, this remains stalled.

@Super Dromaeosaurus:@Åttiotrean 226: —Michael Z. 15:35, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, . . .
Sure. Super Ψ Dro 19:17, 19 April 2021 (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.

Requested move 31 October 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans (talk) 03:37, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pokuttia–Bukovina dialect → Pokuttian–Bukovinian dialect – As per WP:CONSISTENT, the name of the dialect should be an adjective, similarly to the existing pages Transcarpathian dialect and Dniestrian dialect (not Transcarpathia dialect and Dniester dialect). Shwabb1 (talk) 14:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Jenks24 (talk) 08:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There’s not a big field to be consistent with. Since consistency is the lowest-priority criterion, do we know that the current version is not more common? The current version is slightly simpler and shorter, which are advantages too, so perhaps it’s three other articles in the category that should be moved instead.
Although we do have Cornish dialect (named for Cornwall), Cumbrian dialect (Cumberland), and Kentish dialect (Kent) with adjectival forms, there are also Dorset dialect, Gower dialect (Gower Peninsula), Manchester dialect (not Mancunian), Potteries dialect (West Midlands), Surrey dialect, and Sussex dialect with attributive forms.  —Michael Z. 16:36, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then what determines which form to use?
It is true that googling Dniester gives more results than Dniestrian, Sloboda gives more results than Slobozhan, etc. Then would it be better to move the other articles? Shwabb1 (talk) 01:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We can survey reliable sources, or look at some important ones. The Encyclopedia of Ukraine uses Bukovyna-Pokutia dialects[5] in the attributive form (with the Ukrainian-derived spelling of Bukovyna, and they use a romanization scheme that drops doubled letters as in Pokuttia). Shevelov’s big phonology book refers to the dialects of Bukovyna and Pokuttia[6] and names them Bukovyna–Pokuttia dialects in the index[7] (I don’t have access to the full text).  —Michael Z. 23:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Google Scholar results, for every spelling, conjugation, and word order:
B–P d
Bian–Pian d
P–B d
Pian–Bian d
Out of 16 combinations, only 7 are used. Out of the 7, 5 use the Ukrainian-derived spelling of -vyna (not -vina), for 16 of 19 total results. Most of the results use the plural dialects.  —Michael Z. 18:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Same order of searches in Google Advanced Book Search, for English-language sources.
B–P d
Bian–Pian d
P–B d
Pian–Bian d
 —Michael Z. 19:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pokuttia–Bukovina_dialect&oldid=1204810797"