Talk:Minsk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in Europe may be able to help!

Minsk is within the scope of the Russian History WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Russian History. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This page has been selected for the release version of Wikipedia and rated B-Class on the assessment scale. It is in the category Geography.

Rangvald ? = Ryngold, father (some think, mithycal) of Mindaugas. Then dates and nationality don't match. Mikkalai 08:35, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 Mińsk 2 Can we now revert a WP:Point edit? 3 Minsk Metro 4 Mińsk, Mińsk Litewski, Mińsk Białoruski, used when Belarus was under the Polish rule. 5 one contributor 6 Density 7 Belarussian and Russian pronounciation.

[edit] Mińsk

It's in line with WP's convention to provide the name in the languages and forms that were in use throughout the city's history. As Minsk used to be in Poland in several periods and the official name of the city was Mińsk, I see no reason for deleting it. However, I do not intend any offence or to hurt Belarusian feelings. Please explain if you really consider having the Polish name harmful. Lysy 06:31, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There is no such convention. If some authors want to make clumsy intros with a dozen of names, it is their problem. In the case of Minsk, it is done differently, see Minsk#Historical names. mikka (t) 07:02, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Why do you claim so ? I, for one, am among the authors who believe that the alternative/historical names should be given in the heading section as is done in other articles. Why do you find it offensive ? Please try to discuss things first instead of enforcing your views, as such behaviour leads to revert wars that I don't think we need here. Lysy 07:39, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I find it an unnecessary clutter. Please try to discuss things first instead of enforcing your views. My view is that names at different time periods are important and deserve a separate section, with detailed explanation when and why the name was used. For example, in some cases one may even include names in Latin, if the city in question was ancient and was discussed in notable chronicles or by notable travellers. This will help in searching. Minsk was also owned by Lithuania and Germany at certain times. There was also a notable Jewish population. Putting a full dozen of names into an intro hardly serves readability. There is English lagnuage, there is an official language of the state in question, the rest is a separate discussion. mikka (t) 17:01, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OK, that's fine with me even if I don't fully share this view. BTW: are you going just to do it on Minsk article, or will you be intoducing similar changes to other pages, like Kaliningrad, Klaipeda, Kosice or Strasbourg ;-) ? Lysy 17:22, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Also, I cannot understand how on Earth you concluded that I find it offensive. I consider Polish and Lithuanian people with great respect. I see you edited the articles Zbigniew Lengren, Mikalojus Konstantinas Ciurlionis, Pilsudski Square. I created them (as well as many others) not because I am an expert, but because I felt respect towards these people and could not stand that the artciles are missing. mikka (t) 17:17, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Great. I'm quite fed up with all these Polish/Russian/Lithuanian/etc nationalisms (which I personally find harmful). Sorry if I misjudged your intentions. Lysy 17:35, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks God we have no Russian nationalists here :)--Czalex 17:38, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think to leave a Polish name for Miensk would be useful, as it really used to be a wide-known name for the city. As we have different names for other cities there (p.e. the Belarusian and even Lithuanian name for Bielastok), I think to leave the Polish name (plus adding the Yiddish name too) would be fair. We'd better improve the article with new images and text info. And in Historical names there's place to write about the history of Miensk's renamings: Miensk-Minsk Litewski-Minsk --Czalex 17:38, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Can we now revert a WP:Point edit?

So, now that this particular WP:Point is made by this edit, and once all the merits of the change in addition to being argued above is also argued at Talk:Kiev#Kijów_in_Kiev_article and on several user's talk pages, where the possible reasons of the correction other the WP:Point where discussed... So, in view of this, can we now move the name Mińsk from the top of the article to the expanded (hopefully soon) section about the city history? Currently, all the article says about those 300+ years is:

In 1326 Minsk became a part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, a common Belarusian-Lithuanian state that after the Union of Lublin in 1569 formed part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Minsk received its town privileges in 1499... [can anyone add anything about this time?]... In 1655 Minsk was conquered by by Aleksey I of Russia

Anyway, I am going to revert this now and if rereverted I am not going to participate in another war. But please, if anyone feels there are reasons to have Mińsk in the very top and the reasons are not addressed properly in all these discussions, and rereverts, please explain why not contribute to the history section instead? Thanks and please no flames. -Irpen 05:53, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

I tend to support Irpen on this point. If the idiocy of Polish contributors continues, I will add Russian names to the top of any article on a Polish city. And this would only be right, considering that Poland belonged to Russia for more than a century. -Ghirlandajo 08:06, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OK, thanks God and all the good-faith editors these two rv wars stopped. Frankly, I also thought for a moment about placing "Varshava" in the Warsaw article and "Belostok" into Bialystok and it appears I was not alone. Anyway, such a WP:counterpoint would be no different from the WP:Point and I am glad no one made that joke. The discussions that would follow at the talk pages might have generated a couple of tickets to the Black Book :). Also, I doubt that this would have lasted longer than a few minutes, while Mińsk was patiently not reverted for 4 days. I will try to have some entries made into this artcile's history section. Unfortunately, I can't contribute much. regards, -Irpen 06:49, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Minsk Metro

Hello everyone, I want to create a megaportal on the Metro systems of the FSU and some eastern European ones (with potentially expanding to cover other things like railroad city transportt etc), if you are interested in giving a helping hand have look at how we wrote the entries for Moscow, Saint Petersburg and Kiev. If anyone wants to start the Minsk section go ahead. Kuban kazak 23:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Too late, all ready done, check it out Minsk Metro --Kuban Cossack 02:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mińsk, Mińsk Litewski, Mińsk Białoruski, used when Belarus was under the Polish rule.

When Minsk was "under the Polish rule"? It belonged of the Duchy of Lithuania. The nobles Polonized after hundreds of years. Xx236 14:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] one contributor

Minsk was never under Polish rule. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania was only tied to Poland through Union of Lublin.

[edit] Density

I'm not quite sure but it sounds pretty amazing that a city with 1.7 million people and a area of 266 km^2 only has 88 people per square kilometer ?

[edit] Belarussian and Russian pronounciation.

In fact Russian pronounciation indicated wrongly. I doubt the Belarussian one may be also wrong.--Nixer 20:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)