DesertInfo (talk | contribs) →Use the spelling Kyiv because this is not a historical article: Ymblanter should stop threatening bans |
|||
Line 220: | Line 220: | ||
[[User:Ymblanter]] performed a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Odessa&curid=55545&diff=1075053185&oldid=1075050263&diffmode=source revert] of [[user:Craigrottman]] to restore the use of ''Kiev'' not ''Kyiv'' spelling, with the edit summary “current consensus is to use Kiev in historical context.” This is false. The scope of the [[Talk:Kyiv/Archive_9#RfC:_Kyiv/Kiev_in_other_articles|decision]] he refers to was “whether to use Kyiv or Kiev ''in an article''.” This geographical article about the city of [[Odessa]] is clearly an “unambiguously current / ongoing topics (e.g. [[Kyiv Metro]]),” where “Kyiv is preferred,” as defined in that consensus. Like this one, the exemplary article has a “History” section, so this is not what it calls an “edge case.” The consensus is clearly to use the ''Kyiv'' spelling in all articles not subject to that decision, such as this one, and we shouldn’t start expanding its scope in opposition to the larger and better established consensus for the main article title [[Kyiv]]. —''[[user:Mzajac|Michael]] [[user_talk:Mzajac|Z]].'' 18:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC) |
[[User:Ymblanter]] performed a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Odessa&curid=55545&diff=1075053185&oldid=1075050263&diffmode=source revert] of [[user:Craigrottman]] to restore the use of ''Kiev'' not ''Kyiv'' spelling, with the edit summary “current consensus is to use Kiev in historical context.” This is false. The scope of the [[Talk:Kyiv/Archive_9#RfC:_Kyiv/Kiev_in_other_articles|decision]] he refers to was “whether to use Kyiv or Kiev ''in an article''.” This geographical article about the city of [[Odessa]] is clearly an “unambiguously current / ongoing topics (e.g. [[Kyiv Metro]]),” where “Kyiv is preferred,” as defined in that consensus. Like this one, the exemplary article has a “History” section, so this is not what it calls an “edge case.” The consensus is clearly to use the ''Kyiv'' spelling in all articles not subject to that decision, such as this one, and we shouldn’t start expanding its scope in opposition to the larger and better established consensus for the main article title [[Kyiv]]. —''[[user:Mzajac|Michael]] [[user_talk:Mzajac|Z]].'' 18:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC) |
||
: Your understanding of this consensus of this question has already been tested, and the result was a six-month topic ban.--[[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 18:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC) |
: Your understanding of this consensus of this question has already been tested, and the result was a six-month topic ban.--[[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 18:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC) |
||
: {{reply to|Mzajac}} Ymblanter has a track record of false allegations and inappropriate conduct but nothing will happen because they're an admin. The conduct on this talk page is inappropriate. If Ymblanter wants to accuse other users of not canvassing or threatening bans, that can be dealt with on a talk page or [[WP:ANI]]. Threatening blocks over such trivial stuff is [[WP:ADMINABUSE]]. We should be able to talk about these things without such hostility. [[User:Desertambition|Desertambition]] ([[User talk:Desertambition|talk]]) 21:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:47, 3 March 2022
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
First bit
In any case, the first bit should be changed to: Odessa (Ukrainian: Оде́са [oˈdɛsɐ]), (Russian: Оде́сса [ɐˈdʲesə]) (historically the common English name is from the Russian version) or something like this. The Ukrainian name should be first. 142.163.194.97 (talk) 23:15, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2021
Dyn32 (talk) 01:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC) Hello. I am a resident of Odesa, I ask you to edit this article, because the Latin name of this city is incorrect on the main page and and by the main link. According to the Ukrainian spelling, this city is called Odesa (with one letter S), while Odessa (with two letters S) is a translation from Russian language. Since in Ukraine the state language is Ukrainian and Russian is the language of national minorities, it will be correct to use the form with one S. Because of the wrong name of the city, many foreigners confuse its name and spell it incorrectly, which in a way offends the people of the city and me in particular. Thanks in advance.
- Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Please supply a reliable source to support what you say, we will not be able to change it without a couple good sources. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:26, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Supporting references for changing spelling from Odessa to Odesa
To support the change of spelling from Odessa to Odesa, here are the references to consider:
- Declaration of United Nation Group of Experts in regard to adoption of Ukrainian spelling[1]
- Romanization system in Ukraine document stating the recommended spellings [2]
- Recent adoption of the Ukrainian romanization system for geographical names by the US Board of Geographic names[3]
In Romanization of Ukrainian article, Odessa remains as the only city in Ukraine, including Temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine that is listed with spelling under the old BGN transliteration conventions from 1965.
Another consideration is the wider adoption of Ukrainian spelling among the Odessa population: 5-fold growth of Ukrainian-speaking population in Odessa over the recent 6 years[4]
I don't see any strong compelling arguments why the change of spelling to Odesa should be reverted. Internetyev (talk) 04:01, 11 November 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Internetyev (talk • contribs) 03:48, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- This is not about the spelling, it is about the most common name in English.It is also incorrect that Odessa is the only Ukrainian city with the most common English name different from Romanization.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:48, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- My wording implies that Odessa is the only city in Ukraine that is listed _on Wikipedia_ under old BGN conventions of 1965, which is correct. I do not state that Odessa is "the only Ukrainian city with the most common English name different from Romanization". I cannot find arguments to state that one variant is more common than the other because it is subjective and does not follow Wikipedia guidelines. Internetyev (talk) 07:52, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- Romanization of Одеса is Odesa. Nobody is disputing this. I reverted your addition exactly for this reason.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:39, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- You have at this point 27 edits on Wikipedia. You are not the first person with less than 100 edits who comes here and, without having much understanding of how Wiokipedia works, tries to impose their vision. You are certainly not the first person who tries to get this article moves to Odessa. None of them could see the arguments why the article should be Odessa, but the consensus still was for Odessa. Try reading the archives of this page, may be you then understand why.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:42, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- No clue what you are talking about when you mentioned "romanization", but the name of the article should most likely indeed be Odesa. Sources linked to below. The same reasons and sources also apply for Kyiv, Lviv and Kharkiv which already follow the ukrainian naming pattern. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 23:12, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ http://www.eki.ee/wgrs/res/res_10_9.htm
- ^ https://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/UNGEGN/docs/10th-uncsgn-docs/econf/E_CONF.101_84_Roman_system_Ukraine_eng.pdf
- ^ https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/romanization-systems
- ^ https://www.iri.org/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/seventh_municipal_survey_may_2021_eng_-_v2.pdf
This article should probably be renamed to "Odesa"
In line with the recent renaming of Kiev to Kyiv, the same reasons should also apply to this article.
Source:
- https://japan.mfa.gov.ua/en/news/73898-official-guidance-on-the-correct-spelling-and-usage-of-ukrainian-place-names direct source from the government that mentions the spelling. Probably as good of a source as you can get on this. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 23:08, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Edit: Also Lviv and Kharkiv seem to be following the Ukrainian naming style. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 23:11, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- WP:COMMONNAME. Mellk (talk) 23:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- WP:COMMONNAME would support the name of the article being Odesa. All official establishments of the city, and the country itself, including the airport, use "Odesa" in english. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 17:39, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
---
- That has been extensively discussed at this very page, and so far the consensus invariably was opposite to your conclusion. Seriously, do you think that a high-profile Wikipedia article has a demonstrably wrong name for twenty years, and you are the first person to notice this?--Ymblanter (talk) 17:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- Kyiv used to be "Kiev" for 15+ years on Wikipedia, so yes, I think article names change constantly. "This is how it's always been" isn't a valid argument on wikipedia. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 17:44, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- Sure, but the argument "the article has a wrong name period" is even less valid. For Kiev, what one one needed was a topic-banned user evading ban.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think Odessa is wrong. Odessa is a valid, correct, alternative spelling. Sorry if my original post made it look like I thought Odessa is wrong or wanted to exclude it. I don't. I think it should be listed as a correct alternative spelling. It's just not the officially used name anymore in english by the city itself or the country. By WP:COMMONNAME, the name of the article should be Odesa and "Odessa" should be listed as the alternative spelling. Exactly what is done now, just reversed. Currently "Odesa" is listed as the alternative spelling, but it should be the other way around. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 20:23, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- This is incorrect. WP:COMMONNAME is not about what name is used officially. It is politically unacceptable to use Odessa now in Ukraine, but the Ukrainian government is not an institution with any authority to establish the English usage. WP:COMMONNAME is about how the city is actually called in English, by reliable English sources, ideally independent of the Ukrainian government. Please read the archives of the page.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:35, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think Odessa is wrong. Odessa is a valid, correct, alternative spelling. Sorry if my original post made it look like I thought Odessa is wrong or wanted to exclude it. I don't. I think it should be listed as a correct alternative spelling. It's just not the officially used name anymore in english by the city itself or the country. By WP:COMMONNAME, the name of the article should be Odesa and "Odessa" should be listed as the alternative spelling. Exactly what is done now, just reversed. Currently "Odesa" is listed as the alternative spelling, but it should be the other way around. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 20:23, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- Sure, but the argument "the article has a wrong name period" is even less valid. For Kiev, what one one needed was a topic-banned user evading ban.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- Kyiv used to be "Kiev" for 15+ years on Wikipedia, so yes, I think article names change constantly. "This is how it's always been" isn't a valid argument on wikipedia. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 17:44, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- That has been extensively discussed at this very page, and so far the consensus invariably was opposite to your conclusion. Seriously, do you think that a high-profile Wikipedia article has a demonstrably wrong name for twenty years, and you are the first person to notice this?--Ymblanter (talk) 17:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Interestingly, Google News Search gives its maximum number of 100 results for each of "Odesa" Ukraine -Wikipedia and "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia. Google Scholar Search of academic sources, limited to 2020–present, returns 11,400 and 15,500, respectively. It could be argued that there is no longer a single WP:COMMONNAME in English. Perhaps we should research what current references say. —Michael Z. 02:13, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
- Google Advanced Book Search (English-language sources) is really showing off its “total results” bug in these searches. It looks like Google’s estimates are nonsense, but counting actual results returned does not clearly favour Odessa, and may indicate a dramatic opposite trend (viz. WP:GOOG).
- 2016: "Odesa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 15, "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 52 (22%)
- 2017: "Odesa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 18, "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 36 (33%)
- 2018: "Odesa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 18, "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 24 (43%)
- 2019: "Odesa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 20, "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 26 (43%)
- 2020: "Odesa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 26, "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 28 (48%)
- 2021: "Odesa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 40, "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 23 (63%)
- 2022: "Odesa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 5, "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia 6 (partial year: 45%)
- Looking at sources suggested by WP:Widely accepted name which are up-to-date and accessible:
- Britannica: Odessa, alternate title Odesa
- Geographic Names Information System (BGN): approved Odesa, variant Odessa
- National Geographic Society:[1][2] Odesa (zoom in to read the small map thumbnails)
- The World Factbook: Odesa
- Library of Congress Subject Headings: Odesa
- Oxford dictionaries: Odessa, Ukrainian name Odesa (that is an English-language context label)
- Merriam-Webster: Odessa, or Ukrainian Odesa (that is an English-language context label)
- The two English-language dictionaries use context labels, indicating that in a Ukrainian subject context, Odesa is the most commonly used spelling. An article on a city in Ukraine is an example of such a context.
- Using the spelling Odesa also fulfils the WP:CRITERIA of precision (distinguishing from other subjects listed in Odessa (disambiguation)), and of consistency since nearly all Ukrainian place names are spelled according to the Ukrainian standard system of Romanization, as recommended by WP:UKR (and consistent with Nova Odesa).
- WP:MODERNPLACENAME tells us to use a current name. Since the last move request was twelve and a half years ago, it’s about time to check consensus. —Michael Z. 04:31, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
- This is a really thorough research into this question. Thank you very much! --Blomsterhagens (talk) 23:33, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
- Some other sources popped up.
- United States Board on Geographic Names uses Odesa.[3]: 8 BGN determines the usage of geographic names for the US government (and runs the Geo Names server mentioned above).
- International Air Transport Association uses Odesa.[4] IATA determines naming of airports and locations in international aviation.
- —Michael Z. 01:30, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Requested move 24 February 2022
Odessa → Odesa – Per WP:MODERNPLACENAME and WP:NPOVTITLE. Please see additional reasons for renaming to Odesa at Talk:Kyiv and this talk page. English language news sources use the Odesa spelling in line with their change from Kiev to Kyiv. For example, see AP News, CNN, NYTimes, Washington Post, The Guardian, BBC, Financial Times, Reuters, CBC, Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail. OjdvQ9fNJWl (talk) 09:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong oppose, too soon. Even if some media started to call the city Odesa today, it is not yet the indication that this is the most common name in English. Right now the usage is chaotic, and does not prove anything.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- can someone provide a proof of chaotic usage? are there any mentions that use "Odessa" spelling? Internetyev (talk) 10:00, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sure--Ymblanter (talk) 11:28, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note that the topic starter is canvassing people who should be clearly favorable to the move arguments: [5]--Ymblanter (talk) 10:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note that I requested comments from users that started the discussions for renaming the article in the sections above. Since you already replied, there was no reason to notify you as well. OjdvQ9fNJWl (talk) 02:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note to closer This is clear WP:CANVASSING: of the above editors who were engaged in the previous discussion, OjdvQ9fNJWl only notified User:Blomsterhagens (see here) and User:Mzajac (see here), these two users were in favor of the move. OjdvQ9fNJWl did not notify the other two users in that discussion, User:Mellk and User:Ymblanter (who were opposed to the move), hence this is textbook canvassing. Eccekevin (talk) 01:17, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- I've notified all users who previously participated in the discussion regardless if they have seen this or not. Thanks for letting me know. OjdvQ9fNJWl (talk) 03:51, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note to closer This is clear WP:CANVASSING: of the above editors who were engaged in the previous discussion, OjdvQ9fNJWl only notified User:Blomsterhagens (see here) and User:Mzajac (see here), these two users were in favor of the move. OjdvQ9fNJWl did not notify the other two users in that discussion, User:Mellk and User:Ymblanter (who were opposed to the move), hence this is textbook canvassing. Eccekevin (talk) 01:17, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note that I requested comments from users that started the discussions for renaming the article in the sections above. Since you already replied, there was no reason to notify you as well. OjdvQ9fNJWl (talk) 02:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I personally don't care how the article is named on the English Wikipedia, but if it's "Odessa" in the Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Franklin Meriam-Webster Dictionary and other reputable dictionaries, then it should probably remain "Odessa" (what most dictionaries tell about "Odesa" is that it's a Ukrainian variant of the name, i.e. a transliteration of the Ukrainian name "Одеса"). Also, it's not true that media have switched over to "Odesa" and those listed above seem to be cherry-picked because the same media still use "Odessa" in their recent news reports (see Reuters, CNN, CBC, The New York Times, The Guardian, BBC etc.). As for the origins of the name "Odessa" in the English language, even if it was widely accepted as a transliteration of the Russian name "Одесса" long time ago, there's nothing problematic considering that Russian speakers form a vast majority in the city. Importantly, the Russian language doesn't belong exclusively to Russia because it has many native speakers outside of its current borders, and this distinction is clearly noted in the language through the adjectives "русский" (="Russian") and "российский" (= "of Russia"). I have many Ukrainian friends who hold a grudge against Russia, but they still use Russian as their primary language. Finally, the timing of this nomination is probably tied with Russia's invasion of Ukraine in the attempt to get increased support from people sympathising with the Ukrainian people, so that's why it was necessary to tell something more about the Russian language as opposed to Russia.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose move. With what's going on at the moment, sources are mixed. I don't believe media have settled on one spelling or the other, so the current page title should remain intact. O.N.R. (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nomination. During the Soviet era, Ukrainian geographical names had been transliterated into English via those names' Russian forms, but since Ukraine has been an independent country for over three decades, Ukrainian names should be transliterated into English via their Ukrainian forms. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 18:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- That’s not true. Mark Twain in his travel book The Innocents Abroad, first published in 1869, uses the name “Odessa”. That was clearly the common name of the city in the pre-Soviet era. Also, the English dictionaries have still not adopted “Odesa” as a more preferable name than “Odessa” (note that “Kyiv” and “Beijing” have replaced “Kiev” and “Peking” in the dictionaries), so it’s not our business to discuss how names should be transliterated into English when linguists have already taken care about them.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- A wider historical view can be indeed taken and the sentence can be slightly enhanced to state, "During the Tsarist and Soviet eras...", but the basic argument remains the same and the decision remains with consensus. The move from Kiev to Kyiv was likely influenced by ongoing events and the same may turn out to be true here. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- A change may, or may not, happen. "Odesa" has a particularly unlettered appearance, doing violence to the symmetry of its origin, Ὀδησσός, Odessos, and, even moreso, when placed into the feminine form. And so follows the "Odessa" name adoption by a number of cities. That the the asymmetric form will become the English standard is not a given. Tachypaidia (talk) 23:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- There are many places in the English-speaking world founded by emigrants from the city and named "Odessa" after it (see Odessa (disambiguation)), so it's very unwise to confuse people just because someone thinks the English language should be revisited because of a name recently popularised and not widely accepted by specialists in the English language.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Geographical names in the English-speaking New World date from the arrival of settlers in the 18th and 19th century. Some of those names are now historically outdated, but continue to exist as reminders of the time of their founding — Kief, North Dakota; Konigsberg, California; Breslau, Ontario; Cracow, Queensland; Cracow, Michigan; Calcutta, Indiana; Calcutta, Ohio or Calcutta, West Virginia. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 22:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- A wider historical view can be indeed taken and the sentence can be slightly enhanced to state, "During the Tsarist and Soviet eras...", but the basic argument remains the same and the decision remains with consensus. The move from Kiev to Kyiv was likely influenced by ongoing events and the same may turn out to be true here. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - In English I still pretty much always see Odessa... even in all newscasts in the last 24 hours. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose ^ --Firestar464 (talk) 02:45, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - "Odessa" is still used far more often in English-language sources. Mellk (talk) 03:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support The WP:COMMONNAME is subject to reevaluation per WP:MODERNPLACENAME and WP:NAMECHANGES. Google news results now favour the spelling Odesa. Per WP:WIAN, current reference NGIA Geo Names designates Odesa approved, Odessa a variant, Britannica gives Odessa, alternate Odesa, World Factbook uses Odesa, M–Webster uses Odessa generally, “or Odesa” for the specific Ukrainian city (and viz. the WP:CRITERION of specificity), LOC Subject Headings has “Odesa (Ukraine)--History.”[6] —Michael Z. 03:53, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- The entire basis of your argument for "support" is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of WP:MODERNPLACENAME, conducting an elementary reading of the actual text of the guideline makes this apparent. The name of Odessa has not changed, the discrepancy here is merely that of spelling/pronunciation based on language and common usage, with WP:COMMONNAME clearly applying here as "Odessa" is used far more commonly than "Odesa".BUZZLIGHTYEAR99 (talk) 07:08, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think it's you that hasn't read WP:MPN properly. Spelling is explicitly included -
In some cases it is not the local name but the spelling of the name in English that has changed over time. For example, Nanjing, as the contemporary pinyin spelling, is used for the name of the article rather than Nanking.
Turnagra (talk) 18:56, 26 February 2022 (UTC) - User:BUZZLIGHTYEAR99, I’ll refer you to a relevant precedent: the detailed decision, citing WP:MODERNPLACENAME, on the move of Kyiv, another city whose name has not changed and has two English WP:COMMONNAMEs (spelling variants): Talk:Kyiv/Archive 7#Requested move 28 August 2020. —Michael Z. 18:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think it's you that hasn't read WP:MPN properly. Spelling is explicitly included -
- Note to closer A WP:CANVASSING incident occurred involving this user. Eccekevin (talk) 01:11, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- This article is on my watchlist.Please tag people
when you try to discredit their opinioninstead of just writing “this user.” —Michael Z. 03:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)- I am not trying to discredit anyone, I am just alerting the closer of WP:CANVASSING (which was not done by you, but the user who canvessed you). Eccekevin (talk) 19:20, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- User:Eccekevin, sorry, I only meant to suggest that the closer should not weight my input by the presumption of unfairness. —Michael Z. 14:28, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- I am not trying to discredit anyone, I am just alerting the closer of WP:CANVASSING (which was not done by you, but the user who canvessed you). Eccekevin (talk) 19:20, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- This article is on my watchlist.Please tag people
- Support - Recent English sources have tended to use Odesa far more than Odessa, especially in media, making sufficient grounds to change this per WP:MPN. Turnagra (talk) 09:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom--176.36.92.78 (talk) 10:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom, recent sources tend to use one s—blindlynx 17:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose pending evidence of a change in English usage. Note also the Google Trends and Google Ngrams data suggest that Odessa is far more common among ordinary English speakers in all English-speaking countries where measurements are available, and has been since the city was refounded (and before then neither was used). [7] [8] Kahastok talk 17:57, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support. Although Odessa has been used more widely, this seems to be changing, parallel to the increased usage of Kyiv versus Kiev. Indeed, with Odessa being the Russian-derived name with Odesa the Ukrainian, a similar change may happen; however some more time is needed to properly gauge the usage of the new form against the old, although it may look like Odesa will supersede its Russian equivalent. ArbDardh (talk) 17:59, 25 February 2022 (UTC)ArbDardh
- Oppose. The version with 2 s appears to still be the most common in English. Maybe things will change in the future, but a move now is premature.Anonimu (talk) 18:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. The most common spelling in English is still the current title. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong oppose This is a textbook case of WP:COMMONNAME. I have almost never, in my extensive historical readings about the history of Europe in English-language books, or just in common parlance, seen Odessa spelled "Odesa". In my opinion the article "Kyiv" should be changed back to "Kiev" as well if we're going to cite that as an example, as that is still by far the most commonly used spelling/pronunciation in English for that city as well. BUZZLIGHTYEAR99 (talk) 06:35, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Nothing so special (talk) 08:42, 26 February 2022 (UTC) — Nothing so special (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Support - Same reason why we changed Kiev to Kyiv. Even if currently "Odessa" has an advantage, the "Odesa" spelling eventually will gain ground and take over. -- Abbasi786786 (talk) 14:30, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- This makes no sense. If you say that Odessa currently is more used, then by WP:COMMONNAME that's what should be used. And if you believe that eventually Odesa will be more common, that doesn't affect Wikipedia because Wikipedia does not predict the future or speculate (see WP:CRYSTALBALL). We don't deal in "eventually". Eccekevin (talk) 01:04, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Bluealbion (talk) 16:25, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support 1. As the apparent official Anglicised version of the Ukrainian name. (WP:MODERNPLACENAME instructs as such - oppose opinions trying to debate commonality are very much secondary to this) 2. Based on precedent of moving Kyiv. 3. Contrary to some users above, it is the only spelling I am seeing this week (when I have paid attention to it) in English news sources (BBC, Telegraph, Independent just the top results) - I would suggest location difference but surely everyone has checked BBC? Kingsif (talk) 16:58, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose: Sources supporting the move are cherry-picked. I can easily find other articles from the same websites that use the current spelling eg: Reuters, BBC, Guardian, Washington Post, NYT, CNN, AP, Reuters, etc. As such, there is not enough evidence presented to say the common name has changed. --Spekkios (talk) 19:49, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- I just linked articles I saw at the time, no cherry picking, while yours clearly have been to make a POINT. Of course, I had the COMMONNAME argument as my third point because I find it the weakest overall, either direction. If "Odesa" is the official anglicisation, it is plain insulting to use an old holdout spelling, no matter how widely used in media it is. But as someone's research in the section above shows, over the years, "Odesa" has been increasingly used and recently overtook "Odessa" across all sources, anyway. If a company changes its name, which is a fair comparison to the world being told they are spelling something wrong, then you will find more sources with the old name, but still move the article to the new name straight away because that is what it is named. Kingsif (talk) 13:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- You might want to read WP:POINT before you reference it. It is not "disruptive" to point out that I can easily find exactly the same sources referenced in the request using the current name and not the proposed name. That means we cannot just use a few news sources to determine what the common name of the article is. "Odesa" might be the WP:OFFICIALNAME, but that is irrelevant, as we do not blindly use whatever the official name of anything is, regardless of if someone finds it "insulting" or not. You might find it insulting, but if you cannot prove that the WP:COMMONNAME of the article has changed: tough. Kyiv was changed not because people found the use of "Kiev" insulting but because it could be actually proved that "Kyiv" is now the common name. That is the same process we use here and up to this point it has not been proved that "Odesa" is the common name. As I said, the only evidence that has been provided is a few news articles which are inconsistent in their use and it can be easily shown that a wide varriety of news sources are using "Odessa". I read the conversation above this request and whomever "someone" is hasn't shown that the name has changed as no one in that conversation had done so. --Spekkios (talk) 19:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- You might want to read the note there, which as I recall says that POINTy behavior isn't limited to disruptive edits. Now,
we do not blindly use whatever the official name of anything is [...] if you cannot prove that the WP:COMMONNAME of the article has changed: tough
- nonsense. Well, the user in the thread above in question is Mzajac, who compiled Google data (recommended for RMs), as well as pointing to the WP:MODERNPLACENAME, which saysFor articles discussing the present, use the modern English name (or local name, if there is no established English name), rather than an older one... In some cases it is not the local name but the spelling of the name in English that has changed over time. For example, Nanjing, as the contemporary pinyin spelling, is used for the name of the article rather than Nanking.
- literally instructing to use the most up-to-date local (i.e. Ukrainian) name and English spelling of such, even if there are masses of sources still using older ones. And for that last reason and just using Wikipedia, I very much dispute that COMMONNAME is always superior to an official name (your use of "anything" suggest you believe nothing has its article given an official over common name); do you call a TV a "TV"? Or a "television set"? Because our article is television set. Just the first object I looked at above my laptop screen. Give it up with claiming Wikipedia always uses COMMONNAME. Kingsif (talk) 21:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)- You're going to have to explain how exactly WP:POINTy applies to my original comment, as now you are telling me to read WP:NOTPOINTy. Are you saying that my comment is WP:NOTPOINTy? Then why bring up WP:POINTy in the first place if it's WP:NOTPOINTy?
- Anyway, WP:MODERNPLACENAME would apply if it can be shown the modern name is "Odesa". That has not happened here. It is quite clear that "Odessa" is still in strong use throughout English-speaking media. It also doesn't tell us to use the Ukrainian name as it specifically tells us to use the modern established English name.
- As for the results by Mzajac I repeat what I said before: they have not shown that the name has changed. Their results are quite flawed, for example:
- Not filtering out non-English language results in Google scholar. There are 4,400 results for "Odesa" but 10,800 for "Odessa" since 2020.
- Google news search shows 51,000 results for "Odesa" but 142,000 for "Odessa".
- I don't know how they are counting book results. In 2016 there were about 4000 results for "Odesa" and 33,000 for "Odessa". Similar results for the same search but from 2020 to today.
- Finally, I thought it was quite obvious that I was talking about geographic terms such as countries or cities. These almost always use the common name of the place and not official. TV is an acronym for television and is covered by WP:NCA. There has to be an extremely good reason why we should not use the common name and so far all that has been presented is a few news articles that I have already easily shown to be inconsistent. --Spekkios (talk) 22:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- User:Spekkios please tag someone when you explicitly criticize their statements, in case your criticism is less than authoritative. Please read WP:SET: I don’t believe anything there implies that a search test is “flawed” if it doesn’t employ “filtering” the way you do. It does suggest that Google’s estimate of number of results is often pure bunk. You have to go to the last page of results, and sometimes it shows that the actual number is vastly different, other times it is clearly still bunk. And it’s helpful to link the last page. For example, your last two searches (2020 to today) yield
- Odesa: “Page 5 of about 4,480 results” — actually showing 43
- Odessa: “Page 4 of about 55,000 results” — actually showing 40 !!!
- How do you accomplish “filtering out non-English language results in Google scholar”? I can’t find any language filter or advanced search for Scholar.
- And I don’t know how you determined Google News results total, because it doesn’t show them for me, and the only way I can make comparisons is to choose a short time frame and count every one while scrolling to the bottom of the endless page, where it loads up to 100. For example, when I search in the last hour, I get Odesa 9,[9] Odessa 16, [10]but it changes every time I reload the search.
- Anyway, my point isn’t that Odesa is clearly the most common name, but that there are two commonly used names, and we should interpret the results much the same way we did in the clear and unchallenged consensus decision on Kyiv. —Michael Z. 16:56, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing out the inaccuracies in the number of results Google returns: I was unaware that it could be vastly inaccurate. The filtering was intended to filter results to Ukraine only. Google scholar has a setting so it can only return results from a certain language (in the left hand drop-down box). I'm not sure what the difference is between a Google search for news and a search using Google News but it again may produce different results. I can get 41 vs 208 when seraching in the last 24 hours. --Spekkios (talk) 18:56, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- User:Spekkios please tag someone when you explicitly criticize their statements, in case your criticism is less than authoritative. Please read WP:SET: I don’t believe anything there implies that a search test is “flawed” if it doesn’t employ “filtering” the way you do. It does suggest that Google’s estimate of number of results is often pure bunk. You have to go to the last page of results, and sometimes it shows that the actual number is vastly different, other times it is clearly still bunk. And it’s helpful to link the last page. For example, your last two searches (2020 to today) yield
- You might want to read the note there, which as I recall says that POINTy behavior isn't limited to disruptive edits. Now,
- You might want to read WP:POINT before you reference it. It is not "disruptive" to point out that I can easily find exactly the same sources referenced in the request using the current name and not the proposed name. That means we cannot just use a few news sources to determine what the common name of the article is. "Odesa" might be the WP:OFFICIALNAME, but that is irrelevant, as we do not blindly use whatever the official name of anything is, regardless of if someone finds it "insulting" or not. You might find it insulting, but if you cannot prove that the WP:COMMONNAME of the article has changed: tough. Kyiv was changed not because people found the use of "Kiev" insulting but because it could be actually proved that "Kyiv" is now the common name. That is the same process we use here and up to this point it has not been proved that "Odesa" is the common name. As I said, the only evidence that has been provided is a few news articles which are inconsistent in their use and it can be easily shown that a wide varriety of news sources are using "Odessa". I read the conversation above this request and whomever "someone" is hasn't shown that the name has changed as no one in that conversation had done so. --Spekkios (talk) 19:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- I just linked articles I saw at the time, no cherry picking, while yours clearly have been to make a POINT. Of course, I had the COMMONNAME argument as my third point because I find it the weakest overall, either direction. If "Odesa" is the official anglicisation, it is plain insulting to use an old holdout spelling, no matter how widely used in media it is. But as someone's research in the section above shows, over the years, "Odesa" has been increasingly used and recently overtook "Odessa" across all sources, anyway. If a company changes its name, which is a fair comparison to the world being told they are spelling something wrong, then you will find more sources with the old name, but still move the article to the new name straight away because that is what it is named. Kingsif (talk) 13:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Per norm Toran107 (talk) 00:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose; a google news search for results in the past month suggests a slight preference for "Odessa". This is likely to change, as news organizations react to the invasion by switching which form they use, but that hasn't happened yet, and we should wait a few months to confirm that the change is not temporary before moving the article. BilledMammal (talk) 03:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Support if we're calling Kiev Kyiv we might as well do the same for this. Great Mercian (talk) 10:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Except Wikipedia doesn't change things on the basis of "might as well." It changed Kiev to Kyiv because the vast majority of English sources are using Kyiv in print and in modern conversations. With Odessa it's the opposite with Odessa being more popular. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- You think I'm stupid, don't you? Great Mercian (talk) 17:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- No, not at all. I took it exactly as you posted. If you meant otherwise I missed it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- You think I'm stupid, don't you? Great Mercian (talk) 17:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Bangalore is not at Bengaluru despite Kolkata, Mumbai, etc. --Spekkios (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Except Wikipedia doesn't change things on the basis of "might as well." It changed Kiev to Kyiv because the vast majority of English sources are using Kyiv in print and in modern conversations. With Odessa it's the opposite with Odessa being more popular. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom, and per reasons listed by User:Kingsif. Recent sources seem to have switched over to the official Ukrainian spelling. Paintspot Infez (talk) 20:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- relying primarily on recent sources WP:RECENTISM, and against policy. Eccekevin (talk) 01:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Mzajac above. Toffeenix (talk) 03:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Excluding very recent news sources, it isn't even close. There isn't even the indication of a trend in ngrams. Srnec (talk) 04:00, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose per Srnec, Spekkios, Ymblanter , and more generally WP:COMMONNAME, WP:RECENTISM, and WP:CRYSTALBALL. Ngrams shows that it is not even close. Also, there seems to be some canvassing on the support side the closer should keep in mind. Eccekevin (talk) 07:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support, news articles are using Ukrainian rather than Russian spellings nowadays, and Wikipedia should reflect this. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 17:40, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Support Odesa is clearly the most appropriate name for a Ukrainian city and almost all recent coverage uses Odesa. Desertambition (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- That is WP:RECENTISM, which is against policy. Eccekevin (talk) 01:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- WP:RECENTISM doesn't apply here at all. Odesa has been the Ukrainian spelling for a long time unless they changed the language recently and "Odesa" is the name used by recently published, reliable, English language media. That is more than enough to qualify for WP:COMMONNAME. Desertambition (talk) 05:44, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- The Ukrainian spelling doesn't matter at all; what matters is the English spelling. And as has been continuously shown, English language media has been at best ambiguous in the spelling used. --Spekkios (talk) 08:10, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Searching Odessa on google news gives more recent results about Odessa, Texas than Ukraine. Whereas searching Odesa has much more results about Odesa, Ukraine. Seems pretty clear that Odesa is the WP:COMMONNAME. Desertambition (talk) 09:27, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Why wouldn't you filter out the Texas results then and search for Ukraine specifically? --Spekkios (talk) 18:56, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- There is no reason to filter out Texas results. If we just filter out the results we don't want then of course the results look more favorable. Fact is that more and more news agencies are using "Odesa" in recent reporting. That meets WP:COMMONNAME requirements. Desertambition (talk) 20:31, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Searching Odessa on google news gives more recent results about Odessa, Texas than Ukraine. Whereas searching Odesa has much more results about Odesa, Ukraine. Seems pretty clear that Odesa is the WP:COMMONNAME. Desertambition (talk) 09:27, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- The Ukrainian spelling doesn't matter at all; what matters is the English spelling. And as has been continuously shown, English language media has been at best ambiguous in the spelling used. --Spekkios (talk) 08:10, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- WP:RECENTISM doesn't apply here at all. Odesa has been the Ukrainian spelling for a long time unless they changed the language recently and "Odesa" is the name used by recently published, reliable, English language media. That is more than enough to qualify for WP:COMMONNAME. Desertambition (talk) 05:44, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- That is WP:RECENTISM, which is against policy. Eccekevin (talk) 01:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:RECENTISM. Khiikiat (talk) 00:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nomination. Since the official language of the country is Ukrainian, the name should be transliterated into English via its Ukrainian form, as per the official Ukrainian National transliteration system. Moreover, major news organisations have begun using the Ukrainian form for some time as per the nomination's explanation, and Google Maps shows the Ukrainian form, therefore the nomination is in line with WP:COMMONNAME. Eduardm (talk) 00:41, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- If that were true, we would have "Beograd" instead of "Belgrade" and "Moskva" instead of "Moscow".--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, significant coverage in English language media does meet WP:COMMONNAME requirements. Belgrade and Moscow are not accurate comparisons. Desertambition (talk) 09:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Desertambition: Why are they not accurate comparisons?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- The Moscow/Moskva, Belgrade/Beograd, Warsaw/Warszawa, Prague/Praha, Munich/München arguments were all on display during the Kyiv/Kiev discussions and were dismissed as inapplicable simply because those are all stable English-language exonyms that are used without a challenge by the countries in question when those countries issue English-language texts.
- On the other hand, city names such as Kiev/Kyiv, Odessa/Odesa, Peking/Beijing, Calcutta/Kolkata or Bombay/Mumbai are challenged by the involved countries because of historical baggage and are no longer stable English-language exonyms, with English-language media using the revised exonyms, which is not the case with Moskva or Beograd. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:02, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- What the involved countries do is completely irrelevant because they're not official regulators of the English language. The name "Odessa" was widely used in the English language long before the modern Russian and Ukrainian literary languages were codified. Moreover, it's evident that the English dictionaries haven't adopted "Odesa" as the main name of the city, but they did it with "Kyiv", so it's clear that this is a case much closer to that of "Belgrade" or "Moscow". I can live with any decision at the end but it's utterly ridiculous to mutilate the language by dumping centuries-old literature and dismissing current dictionaries just because there's a recent tendency in the media to use "Odesa" more often. At the very least, give the linguists writing dictionaries a say.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- If we are expected to agree that "it's utterly ridiculous to mutilate the language by dumping centuries-old literature" in choosing "Odesa" over "Odessa", then we would have to accept that we acted with equal ridiculousness in dumping Peking for Beijing, Bombay for Mumbai, Calcutta for Kolkata and Kiev for Kyiv. Media outlets follow manuals of style, all of which indicate Belgrade and Moscow, not Beograd and Moskva. Thus, when we see reliable sources following revised manuals that indicate "Odesa" rather than "Odessa", we know that time has come to follow suit. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's again not true. Many reputable English dictionaries have adopted "Beijing" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Meriam-Webster Dictionary), "Mumbai" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Meriam-Webster Dictionary), "Kolkata" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary) and "Kyiv" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Meriam-Webster Dictionary) as primary names, whereas none have done so for "Odesa" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Franklin Meriam-Webster Dictionary and note that Collins Dictionary doesn't even mention the existence of "Odesa" as an alternative name). You're welcome to argue about "Odesa" at any time once you discover that specialists in the English language, reputable dictionaries or high-ranked publishers have switched over to that name. But arguing that we should change the name because some media, whose content isn't even proofread, decided to use it alongside "Odessa" in the absence of even slightest approval by the scientific community is nothing other than a clear mutilation of the language.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- "Clear mutilation of the language" by Financial Times or NPR "whose content isn't even proofread"? When events move at an accelerated pace, orthography used by reliable sources is likewise revised. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 15:30, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- That’s nice. Please ping me when it’s officially revised by linguists in reputable dictionaries or handbooks of orthography and I’ll vote to support the change. Until then, it’s too soon and a crystal-ball territory.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- "Clear mutilation of the language" by Financial Times or NPR "whose content isn't even proofread"? When events move at an accelerated pace, orthography used by reliable sources is likewise revised. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 15:30, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's again not true. Many reputable English dictionaries have adopted "Beijing" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Meriam-Webster Dictionary), "Mumbai" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Meriam-Webster Dictionary), "Kolkata" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary) and "Kyiv" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Meriam-Webster Dictionary) as primary names, whereas none have done so for "Odesa" (see Oxford's Lexico, Collins Dictionary, Franklin Meriam-Webster Dictionary and note that Collins Dictionary doesn't even mention the existence of "Odesa" as an alternative name). You're welcome to argue about "Odesa" at any time once you discover that specialists in the English language, reputable dictionaries or high-ranked publishers have switched over to that name. But arguing that we should change the name because some media, whose content isn't even proofread, decided to use it alongside "Odessa" in the absence of even slightest approval by the scientific community is nothing other than a clear mutilation of the language.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- If we are expected to agree that "it's utterly ridiculous to mutilate the language by dumping centuries-old literature" in choosing "Odesa" over "Odessa", then we would have to accept that we acted with equal ridiculousness in dumping Peking for Beijing, Bombay for Mumbai, Calcutta for Kolkata and Kiev for Kyiv. Media outlets follow manuals of style, all of which indicate Belgrade and Moscow, not Beograd and Moskva. Thus, when we see reliable sources following revised manuals that indicate "Odesa" rather than "Odessa", we know that time has come to follow suit. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- What the involved countries do is completely irrelevant because they're not official regulators of the English language. The name "Odessa" was widely used in the English language long before the modern Russian and Ukrainian literary languages were codified. Moreover, it's evident that the English dictionaries haven't adopted "Odesa" as the main name of the city, but they did it with "Kyiv", so it's clear that this is a case much closer to that of "Belgrade" or "Moscow". I can live with any decision at the end but it's utterly ridiculous to mutilate the language by dumping centuries-old literature and dismissing current dictionaries just because there's a recent tendency in the media to use "Odesa" more often. At the very least, give the linguists writing dictionaries a say.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- No, it is not even close. Eccekevin (talk) 19:18, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- That represents all of the things listed in Odessa (disambiguation). Search Google Books with a real narrowed search, page to the end and count the actual results, and tell me how close it is (2020 to present): Odesa 40, Odessa 25. —Michael Z. 20:43, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Only including 2020-present is WP:RECENTISM. But also, searching for "Odesa" (even since 2020) literally asks you did you mean "Odessa" Ukraine -Wikipedia. JSTOR (which is modre indicative of Academia than GoogleBooks) has 10 times more results for Odessa Ukraine than Odesa Ukraine. Even just after 2020, it's 49 results for Odessa and 15 for Odesa, so even in the past two years there is the academic sources use Odessa more. Eccekevin (talk) 23:02, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- That represents all of the things listed in Odessa (disambiguation). Search Google Books with a real narrowed search, page to the end and count the actual results, and tell me how close it is (2020 to present): Odesa 40, Odessa 25. —Michael Z. 20:43, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Desertambition: Why are they not accurate comparisons?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, significant coverage in English language media does meet WP:COMMONNAME requirements. Belgrade and Moscow are not accurate comparisons. Desertambition (talk) 09:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- If that were true, we would have "Beograd" instead of "Belgrade" and "Moskva" instead of "Moscow".--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Support per nom--RicardoNixon97 (talk) 15:14, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment, I'm not sure the correct Ukrainian transliteration clearly has caught on with most English-language sources, although Kyiv has certainly overtaken Kiev. Until I see more reliable English-language sources using "Odesa", I'd say wait. Would a personal name be different? Example: as far as I'm aware, Wladimir Klitschko has never gone by his real-name "Volodymyr Klychko" outside Ukraine, so that would be surely wouldn't be changed per WP:COMMONNAME. —Jonny Nixon (talk) 02:39, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Per nom. The name of the city is Odesa in the official local language. Stationary (talk) 03:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- If "Chornobyl" is the official name, then would you argue that Chernobyl needs to be moved, even though "Chornobyl" is seldom used in English-language sources and is not the WP:COMMONNAME? Mellk (talk) 06:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- Lot of users here seem to not understand WP:COMMONNAME unfortunately (including Stationary). The title is the common name in English, not in the local language. Eccekevin (talk) 07:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- If "Chornobyl" is the official name, then would you argue that Chernobyl needs to be moved, even though "Chornobyl" is seldom used in English-language sources and is not the WP:COMMONNAME? Mellk (talk) 06:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, this is English-language Wikipedia and we should use the commonly-used English-language name. What it is called in the official language of Ukraine is not relevant to what it is called in English. As for the future, WP:CRYSTAL applies: at present lots of English-language TV programmes have "Odesa" on their maps; but their language skills are such that they usually pronounce Kharkiv wrongly (the first K should be silent). I do not think we can rely on these people for what places are called or how to pronounce the words.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:55, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The "recent" usages being referred to are a result of the on-going events; and are way too soon; and are clearly chaotic as put by Ymblanter — DaxServer (t · c) 13:54, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Russian marines landing in Odessa
This has been indeed reported in the morning by a number of reliable sources, but all of them quote Anton Gerashchenko, they did not make own research. It has never been followed up and seems yo be disinformation. If no follow-up has been found, and absent new developments, I am going to remove the sentence tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- Done--Ymblanter (talk) 07:12, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- There were airstrikes reported on the first day of the invasion. Should they be added? Seems notable considering the 2014 violence and attacks are also mentioned in the postwar section. OjdvQ9fNJWl (talk) 06:31, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2022
Odessa is the Russian spelling. Odesa is the Ukrainian and is most proper. Same with Kyiv. It is Kyiv NOT Kiev 2600:1012:B01F:5873:4918:61E8:D7FA:F5E6 (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Not done for now: There is a page move request already in progress. Kahastok talk 21:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
ମୁଁ ଡଚି ଗଲି
What this meaning 42.109.129.220 (talk) 02:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Use the spelling Kyiv because this is not a historical article
User:Ymblanter performed a revert of user:Craigrottman to restore the use of Kiev not Kyiv spelling, with the edit summary “current consensus is to use Kiev in historical context.” This is false. The scope of the decision he refers to was “whether to use Kyiv or Kiev in an article.” This geographical article about the city of Odessa is clearly an “unambiguously current / ongoing topics (e.g. Kyiv Metro),” where “Kyiv is preferred,” as defined in that consensus. Like this one, the exemplary article has a “History” section, so this is not what it calls an “edge case.” The consensus is clearly to use the Kyiv spelling in all articles not subject to that decision, such as this one, and we shouldn’t start expanding its scope in opposition to the larger and better established consensus for the main article title Kyiv. —Michael Z. 18:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- Your understanding of this consensus of this question has already been tested, and the result was a six-month topic ban.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Mzajac: Ymblanter has a track record of false allegations and inappropriate conduct but nothing will happen because they're an admin. The conduct on this talk page is inappropriate. If Ymblanter wants to accuse other users of not canvassing or threatening bans, that can be dealt with on a talk page or WP:ANI. Threatening blocks over such trivial stuff is WP:ADMINABUSE. We should be able to talk about these things without such hostility. Desertambition (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC)