This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
Indeed, KievKiev was recently moved to Kyiv following a long RM, with closing arguments clearly stating that both spellings are used in the English language, with various merits, and that the "better title" should now be Kyiv, explicitly reverting a previous consensus that Kiev was the better English-language name. It is therefore inappropriate to mention here that Kiev is Russian and Kyiv Ukrainian, as both are English.
It is also non-neutral as it adopts a nationalist POV strongly connected to one side of the debate. It is lastly plain wrong, as the latin transliteration from Russian word Киев is Kiyev, as stated in the first words of target article Kyiv.
So, you are saying that English does not have a name of its own for the capital of Ukraine? IMHO opinion that is hogwash. Continuous usage makes a loanword into an English word. Not to mention that Kiev and Kyiv are neither written in Cyrillic letters nor following the standards for transliteration from Russian or Ukrainian. --Khajidha (talk) 17:28, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
English does not have a name of its own for many cities all over the world. English-speaking people use the names from the languages of other countries. Both "Kyiv" and "Kiev" are examples of this, and so is Beijing, Kolkata, Moscow, Rio (Rio de Janeiro) – the list goes on and on. In this case we have the English-used forms of the Ukrainian and Russian renditions of the capital of Ukraine. P.I. Ellsworthed.put'r there17:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I won't disagree with that, however my point is that they are (also?) alternative-language or other-language words as well, and they should continue to be tracked (categorized) as such. P.I. Ellsworthed.put'r there18:19, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Not to you are they relevant; however, their origins must be relevant to somebody or their etymologies wouldn't be prominently displayed in dictionaries and in Wikipedia articles, would they? P.I. Ellsworthed.put'r there18:38, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
On that we will have to agree to disagree. I've been categorizing redirects on Wikipedia for more than ten years, and it's probably obvious to everyone who reads this that I consider "Kiev" to be a properly and correctly categorized alternative-language redirect firmly relevant to improvement of this reference work. P.I. Ellsworthed.put'r there18:54, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Many words in English are derived from other languages, and many words used in English are also other-language words and it is often a gray area which way some words should be sorted. That could be debated for longer than the Kiev vs. Kyiv name change request. Arguing whether or not "Kiev" is an English word will never change the fact that it is also derived from the Russian language as an English-language rendition of the capital of Ukraine (no longer quite as commonly used as "Kyiv", of course). P.I. Ellsworthed.put'r there18:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I thought at the time that the edit request was an inadvertent misuse of {{Edit fully-protected}} because the template was used before any attempt to get consensus. Plausibly because the user using the template didn't realise that the edit was controversial.
The word Kiev has been used to refer to the city for centuries. Until the last quarter century or so it was the only word used in English. It is an English word, and the move of our article to Kyiv does not change this fact.
It is also a somewhat non-standard English transcription of a Russian word. I do not strongly object to our acknowledging this. Though I would suggest that Kiev does not clearly fit in with the rest of the contents of Category:Redirects from Russian-language terms.
Oppose Both of these redirect templates belong here. Kiev is an English word, from Russian. Is the named used in English unambiguously “not Russian” at all? I don’t think so. Webster’s New World College Dictionary, 5th ed. (2018), defines Kiev as “Russ. name for Kyiv,” and refers to the headword Kyiv. I believe the dictionary means it is the spelling used in a Russian subject context, but numerous sources about the name clearly state that it is associated with Russian, derived from Russian, and considered Russian (e.g., a Columbia University lecturer quoted by the NY Times calls it “a Russian spelling”). ¶ But never mind that argument. It is academic, since separately from the normal English usage, Kiev is also by far the most common romanization of Russian Киев, and supported explicitly by numerous other sources (NY Times: “The New York Times still spells it Kiev, which is the transliteration from Russian” – the paper changed its practice five days later). It is as standard as it can get: the Russian name is represented as Kiev in the Latin alphabet according to at least eleven of thirteen romanization standards documented in Romanization of Russian ¶ It is also non-neutral as it adopts a nationalist POV strongly connected to one side of the debate – say what, now? —MichaelZ.18:27, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Not done From this brief discussion, I don't feel like there's consensus to remove the category. Redirects, since they're largely hidden from readers, don't really have the same NPOV considerations as articles (See WP:RNEUTRAL), and there's a clear maintenance benefit from documenting the reason for the spelling difference and placing it into a category of similar items. Without a wider discussion, I don't see consensus forming here to remove the R cat. — Wug·a·po·des01:38, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Content Disclaimer
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.