| Revision as of 14:46, 1 July 2008 editBiruitorul (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers148,364 edits +← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 22:18, 29 January 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,025,748 edits Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion | ||
| (13 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| | |||
| {{move|Leningrad People's Militia Army}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Military history|class=Start|B1=n|B2=n|B3=y|B4=y|B5=n|Russian=y|WWII=y}} | |||
| {{WPMILHIST | |||
| }} | |||
| <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> | |||
| |B-Class-1= | |||
| <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> | |||
| |B-Class-2= | |||
| <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> | |||
| |B-Class-3= | |||
| <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> | |||
| |B-Class-4= | |||
| <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> | |||
| |B-Class-5= | |||
| |class=Start | |||
| |Russian-task-force=yes}} | |||
| ==Requested move== | ==Requested move== | ||
| <div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:polltop --> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> 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 proposal was '''no consensus'''. ] (]) 04:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Note: there's a related move request at ]. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 14:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC) Editors may consider centralising the discussion there. ](]) 22:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ] → ] — See ] - English is preferred. —] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 03:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC) | ] → ] — See ] - English is preferred. —] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 03:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :Biruitorul, '''you know full well''' this is not the only English translation used for the article as this was brought up on the main Project page. The function of the Narodnoe Opolcheniye was never that of a militia, and it does not translate as People's Militia either. This move is nothing but a cause to provoke conflict before an RfC has been conducted--] (]) ♠< |
:Biruitorul, '''you know full well''' this is not the only English translation used for the article as this was brought up on the main Project page. The function of the Narodnoe Opolcheniye was never that of a militia, and it does not translate as People's Militia either. This move is nothing but a cause to provoke conflict before an RfC has been conducted--] (]) ♠<span style="color:#BB0000;">♥</span><span style="color:#BB0000;">♦</span>♣ 00:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ::Kindly ] and refrain from speculating on what I "know full well". I know of no RfC - I merely know that I saw a title I thought should be changed and brought it to RM for consideration. If you oppose the move, by all means say so, but do try and do this without veering into speculation on my motives. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 03:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | ::Kindly ] and refrain from speculating on what I "know full well". I know of no RfC - I merely know that I saw a title I thought should be changed and brought it to RM for consideration. If you oppose the move, by all means say so, but do try and do this without veering into speculation on my motives. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 03:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :::I assume nothing. How did you come across the article? Its interesting how you are selective about preference for English--] (]) ♠< |
:::I assume nothing. How did you come across the article? Its interesting how you are selective about preference for English--] (]) ♠<span style="color:#BB0000;">♥</span><span style="color:#BB0000;">♦</span>♣ 08:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ::::] is a fundamental guideline and you would do well to respect it. How I came across the page, and speculation about my alleged "selective preference" for English, is not germane to the topic at hand. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 14:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | ::::] is a fundamental guideline and you would do well to respect it. How I came across the page, and speculation about my alleged "selective preference" for English, is not germane to the topic at hand. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 14:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| Line 31: | Line 24: | ||
| ===Discussion=== | ===Discussion=== | ||
| :''Any additional comments:'' | :''Any additional comments:'' | ||
| ::If the WP:RM fails to settle on People's Militia, to avoid the half/half English/Russian of this title, would it not be more consistent if it become something like Leningradskaya N.O. Armiya? What do people think? ](]) 22:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::It seems to me that you are more bent on having it your way, and renaming into English than actually bothering to understand the use of "militia" in English, and in England, and the existence of Opolcheniye, and explaining the difference to the user of what is a reference work. It is more important that the subjects are defined in text and not what guideline is applied to the article titles. In this case you simply refuse to understand that militia can not be applied to Opolcheniye as a translation, and hence the many different translations that have been used over the more then 150 years in English which I have cited--] (]) ♠<span style="color:#BB0000;">♥</span><span style="color:#BB0000;">♦</span>♣ 22:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Do review ] (an official policy). Even if you contend ''Opolcheniye'' "cannot" be translated as "militia", what concerns us is that it ''has'' in fact been translated as "militia" by reliable sources: , , , . ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 23:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::If you go to the ], you will see the very many different translations offered in reliable sources that I added to the article (I just need to format the references). These have been around for weeks. However, just because someone uses any given translation does not mean its a correct one, and in this case, no one does because the term and the concept are not translatable into English. The clarification of this is what a reference work is supposed to do, i.e. to survey the available published sources, and then define what the correct usage is, and sometimes find that none are--] (]) ♠<span style="color:#BB0000;">♥</span><span style="color:#BB0000;">♦</span>♣ 23:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Claims of ] are generally overblown and nothing in the present case indicates ''Narodnoe Opolcheniye'' doesn't at least have an approximate translation that will be more meaningful to Anglophone readers. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 05:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.''</div><!-- Template:pollbottom --> | |||
| == External links modified == | |||
| Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
| I have just modified one external link on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080103221232/http://www.encspb.ru/article.php?kod=2804001188 to http://www.encspb.ru/article.php?kod=2804001188 | |||
| When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
| {{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
| Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 22:07, 13 May 2017 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 22:18, 29 January 2024
 | This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Referencing and citation: criterion not met
Structure: criterion met
Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion 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 proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 04:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Note: there's a related move request at Talk:Narodnoe_Opolcheniye#Requested_move. Biruitorul 14:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC) Editors may consider centralising the discussion there. Buckshot06(prof) 22:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Leningrad Narodnoe Opolcheniye Army → Leningrad People's Militia Army — See WP:UE - English is preferred. —Biruitorul 03:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Biruitorul, you know full well this is not the only English translation used for the article as this was brought up on the main Project page. The function of the Narodnoe Opolcheniye was never that of a militia, and it does not translate as People's Militia either. This move is nothing but a cause to provoke conflict before an RfC has been conducted--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 00:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- Kindly assume good faith and refrain from speculating on what I "know full well". I know of no RfC - I merely know that I saw a title I thought should be changed and brought it to RM for consideration. If you oppose the move, by all means say so, but do try and do this without veering into speculation on my motives. Biruitorul 03:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- I assume nothing. How did you come across the article? Its interesting how you are selective about preference for English--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 08:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- WP:AGF is a fundamental guideline and you would do well to respect it. How I came across the page, and speculation about my alleged "selective preference" for English, is not germane to the topic at hand. Biruitorul 14:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- I assume nothing. How did you come across the article? Its interesting how you are selective about preference for English--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 08:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- Kindly assume good faith and refrain from speculating on what I "know full well". I know of no RfC - I merely know that I saw a title I thought should be changed and brought it to RM for consideration. If you oppose the move, by all means say so, but do try and do this without veering into speculation on my motives. Biruitorul 03:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Survey
- Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with
*'''Support'''or*'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Misplaced Pages's naming conventions.
Discussion
- Any additional comments:
- If the WP:RM fails to settle on People's Militia, to avoid the half/half English/Russian of this title, would it not be more consistent if it become something like Leningradskaya N.O. Armiya? What do people think? Buckshot06(prof) 22:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- It seems to me that you are more bent on having it your way, and renaming into English than actually bothering to understand the use of "militia" in English, and in England, and the existence of Opolcheniye, and explaining the difference to the user of what is a reference work. It is more important that the subjects are defined in text and not what guideline is applied to the article titles. In this case you simply refuse to understand that militia can not be applied to Opolcheniye as a translation, and hence the many different translations that have been used over the more then 150 years in English which I have cited--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 22:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- Do review WP:V (an official policy). Even if you contend Opolcheniye "cannot" be translated as "militia", what concerns us is that it has in fact been translated as "militia" by reliable sources: , , , . Biruitorul 23:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- If you go to the Narodnoe Opolcheniye, you will see the very many different translations offered in reliable sources that I added to the article (I just need to format the references). These have been around for weeks. However, just because someone uses any given translation does not mean its a correct one, and in this case, no one does because the term and the concept are not translatable into English. The clarification of this is what a reference work is supposed to do, i.e. to survey the available published sources, and then define what the correct usage is, and sometimes find that none are--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- Claims of untranslatability are generally overblown and nothing in the present case indicates Narodnoe Opolcheniye doesn't at least have an approximate translation that will be more meaningful to Anglophone readers. Biruitorul 05:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- If you go to the Narodnoe Opolcheniye, you will see the very many different translations offered in reliable sources that I added to the article (I just need to format the references). These have been around for weeks. However, just because someone uses any given translation does not mean its a correct one, and in this case, no one does because the term and the concept are not translatable into English. The clarification of this is what a reference work is supposed to do, i.e. to survey the available published sources, and then define what the correct usage is, and sometimes find that none are--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- Do review WP:V (an official policy). Even if you contend Opolcheniye "cannot" be translated as "militia", what concerns us is that it has in fact been translated as "militia" by reliable sources: , , , . Biruitorul 23:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- It seems to me that you are more bent on having it your way, and renaming into English than actually bothering to understand the use of "militia" in English, and in England, and the existence of Opolcheniye, and explaining the difference to the user of what is a reference work. It is more important that the subjects are defined in text and not what guideline is applied to the article titles. In this case you simply refuse to understand that militia can not be applied to Opolcheniye as a translation, and hence the many different translations that have been used over the more then 150 years in English which I have cited--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 22:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- If the WP:RM fails to settle on People's Militia, to avoid the half/half English/Russian of this title, would it not be more consistent if it become something like Leningradskaya N.O. Armiya? What do people think? Buckshot06(prof) 22:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Leningrad Narodnoe Opolcheniye Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080103221232/http://www.encspb.ru/article.php?kod=2804001188 to http://www.encspb.ru/article.php?kod=2804001188
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:07, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Categories: