| Revision as of 05:28, 20 February 2008 editCarlossuarez46 (talk | contribs)501,458 edits resp← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:04, 20 February 2008 edit undoCarlossuarez46 (talk | contribs)501,458 edits respNext edit → | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| ] was forged as a giant compromise with input from everyone including one of the most ardent pro-Turkish editors around here who eventually was cajolled to accept the Greek names on Turkish cities, villages, and rivers, lakes, etc. It isn't to prove who was where first - we all know that - or who has claim to what - there are lots of articles about who has claim to whatever - and frankly, naming doesn't imply claiming, in English, we call the capital of Greece Athens, one big city Salonika, and another historically significant one Corinth - all based on, but not the same as the Greek names of those places. Doesn't mean that England or Jamaica or anywhere else English is spoken claims any of those places as theirs. ] (]) 05:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC) | ] was forged as a giant compromise with input from everyone including one of the most ardent pro-Turkish editors around here who eventually was cajolled to accept the Greek names on Turkish cities, villages, and rivers, lakes, etc. It isn't to prove who was where first - we all know that - or who has claim to what - there are lots of articles about who has claim to whatever - and frankly, naming doesn't imply claiming, in English, we call the capital of Greece Athens, one big city Salonika, and another historically significant one Corinth - all based on, but not the same as the Greek names of those places. Doesn't mean that England or Jamaica or anywhere else English is spoken claims any of those places as theirs. ] (]) 05:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| Once again, denialism. There are Greek laws making these place name changes. If the population were Greek and they were using this place name before the legal rename, it qualifies as being used by Greeks, if the population was Slavic, it also qualifies. What you cannot prove is that prior to the Greek government's renaming that no one including the government used that name. This is impossible, because the Greek lawmakers weren't concerning themselves passing laws changing names that didn't exist, like now changing the name of XYZ to Athens when no one calls the Greek capital "XYZ". ] (]) 06:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:04, 20 February 2008
Hi, you don't have to write here that you've sent me an email, I check my email all the time.
/Archive 1 (16 March 2006 - 19 December 2006)
/Archive 2 (20 December 2006 - 10 January 2008)
Slavic Names in Greek cities
Point me to where this consensus is documented. Parallel and historic names are always placed in articles: like Greek ones in Turkey and elsewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean. Without seeing where this consensus is documented, it's hard to assess whether there really is a consensus or whether consensus has changed. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Aha, I have discovered the policy and everything I have done is as requested by it: Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (geographic names) - read it carefully where alternative prior names are welcome in the lead paragraph. I will not revert myself as you request. Further, a reversion by you would be contra the policy, and viewed as destructive. If you don't like the policy, discuss it at the relevant talk page. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Your edit to Krya Vrysi, Pella has been reverted per policy, your sarcastic edit summary seems to indicate a malevalent motive. You should not make personal attacks. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Escalate it wherever you please. The policy I cite gives the instructions that what I have done is proper and what you have done is not. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Feel free. As for Propogandist Book, on what basis do you make that claim? Most of the Greek cities are sourced to Greek sources, are you sure that these are unbiased to the same level you have Slavic sources. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:23, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
He probably has a point of view; all authors do to some extent, especially authors who like to gloss over the population exchange between Greece & Turkey that occurred in the 1920's. All of the name forms in the book seem confirmed everywhere I looked - I am not using his descriptions or characterizations of what happened and historic population figures - but these would likely be confirmed as well, because they are cited to various Greek sources such as the laws by which each place's name was changed. Whatever point of view the author has for writing his book or by which he wants to show that Slavs were first or whatever is all bulls---. It's just the parallel names that are of interest to me, and there is little dispute that most places in the Balkans have Greek, Latin, Slavic, Turkish, and probably other names: Albanian, Romanian, French, German, English, Illyrian, etc. It bears no moment as to who was where first. If you can find sources that show older forms still from the Byzantine times, Roman Empire, Alexander's Empire or the follow-on states, say, those can be put in also. Only very sensitive readers will see anything more than adding encyclopedic - and relatively undisputable - content to articles. After all, I am neither Greek nor Turkish nor Slav nor Balkan in any way - and I have no trouble adding Latin and other earlier forms to places in Spain. Spain was ruled from Rome - yes, the brave among us will acknowledge that; the wise will embrace what Rome left us. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (geographic names) was forged as a giant compromise with input from everyone including one of the most ardent pro-Turkish editors around here who eventually was cajolled to accept the Greek names on Turkish cities, villages, and rivers, lakes, etc. It isn't to prove who was where first - we all know that - or who has claim to what - there are lots of articles about who has claim to whatever - and frankly, naming doesn't imply claiming, in English, we call the capital of Greece Athens, one big city Salonika, and another historically significant one Corinth - all based on, but not the same as the Greek names of those places. Doesn't mean that England or Jamaica or anywhere else English is spoken claims any of those places as theirs. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Once again, denialism. There are Greek laws making these place name changes. If the population were Greek and they were using this place name before the legal rename, it qualifies as being used by Greeks, if the population was Slavic, it also qualifies. What you cannot prove is that prior to the Greek government's renaming that no one including the government used that name. This is impossible, because the Greek lawmakers weren't concerning themselves passing laws changing names that didn't exist, like now changing the name of XYZ to Athens when no one calls the Greek capital "XYZ". Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)