Talk:Polesia

Belarus High‑importance

	Belarus portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belarus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belarus 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.BelarusWikipedia:WikiProject BelarusTemplate:WikiProject BelarusBelarus articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Ukraine High‑importance

	Ukraine portal This article 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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Mid‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move[edit]

Discuss the proposed name change here.

Polesie → Polesia – Polesia is the English name and using it would solve the argument above ↑

Voting[edit]

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

Support for above reasons. LuiKhuntek 06:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, for the below reason. —Michael Z. 2006-01-10 07:37 Z
Oppose. Polesie is the well established name in English usage. No need to use the name in Latin. --_Lysy^talk 08:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as the region spreads across multiple countries. Olessi 17:15, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I Support this because this is in Belorus and should not be Polish anymore 167.7.39.100 20:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Jonathunder 04:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Based on what? My sources on Ukrainian history use Polissia. A Google search of English sites only yields the following results. —Michael Z. 2006-01-10 07:37 Z

Google hits are a poor way of determining encyclopedic usage (e.g., "fart" vs. "flatulence" or "fuck" vs. "sexual intercourse") LuiKhuntek 10:28, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What an odd comparison. I have never heard of the region myself, however I believe the "Polesie" version seems to be by far the most common.... hm. Why are you proposing on changing the name, what are your arguments? Gryffindor 00:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See below for arguments. LuiKhuntek 03:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Polesia" is the historical Latin term. It doesn't seem to be used much nowadays. Paul Robert Magocsi's 'Historical Atlas of Central Europe uses Polesie (on a map showing regions in 1930). In comparison, he uses the English/Latin term Podlachia instead of Podlasie. If Google is going to be used, Google Books or Google Scholar should be used instead of regular Google.

Google Books:

Polesie 489
Palesse 25
Polissia 15
Polissya 13
Polesia 151

Google Scholar:

Those results indicate that Polesie is the most commonly used term, although not all results are accurate (some hits are based on surnames and other disqualifiers). As the region spreads across multiple countries, Polesia would be a neutral term to use in English, IMO. Olessi 00:10, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two main arguments for Polesia include:

1. This is English Wikipedia, use the English encyclopedic term. Polesie shows up overwhelmingly in web hits because (1) Polish is the only Latin-alphabet language of the region and because (2) much of history in the West tends toward a Polish perspective. Because (3) Polesia is a relatively obscure region in English-language scholarship, it's just not on many people's radar and scholars ignorant of the English form will default toward one of the local forms. It is obscurity and not age that makes it seem that Polesia is a historical Latin form. (A similar example would be catties and taels -- these terms for Chinese measurement are almost unknown to English speakers, even those living in China who mostly use the Chinese forms, but they are the correct encyclopedic terms.)

2. "As the region spreads across multiple countries, Polesia would be a neutral term to use in English" per Olessi above. All of the other local forms (Polesie, Poles'e, Paliessie, Polissja) are exclusive to one language and use of the English form prevents POV accusations in an area of frequent territorial shifts.

Paul Robert Magocsi's Historical Atlas of Central Europe (an excellent reference) uses Polesie (on a map showing regions in 1930) because of his editorial policy that "names (of administrative subdivisions) are given in the language of the country that created those subdivisions" (page xii in the 2nd ed.). "Polesie" was a Polish subdivision at the time and given in Polish just as Pomorze was for Pomerania and Wołyn for Volhynia. On the "Ukraine in the 20th Century" map (page 138, 2nd ed.), he uses "Polissia."

Given that an English term exists and that the region straddles several countries, Polesia should be used.

LuiKhuntek 03:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Google searches I linked to above are for English pages only. Both Magocsi's and Subtelny's big history books use Polesie. On what basis is Polesia "the historical Latin term" and an "English term?" —Michael Z. 2006-01-11 17:29 Z

New Advent uses Polesia. Please correct if you know of a more correct Latin term for the region. Olessi 23:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have evidence for Latin; I'm concerned with English. However, the case for a Latin (and an English) form of Polesia is backed up by the existence of exonymic forms in other Western European languages that point to a Polesia form: Polesien (or Podlesien) in German and Danish, Polesië in Dutch, Polessia in Italian, and Polésie in French. (Compare Ruthenia, Volhynia, etc.) That the English and Latin form coincide is hardly unusual for European toponyms.

Specifically in regards to Polesia being an English form, Polesia is used in scholarly references spanning a large time period and covering a range of subject areas. Some examples are:

"Who Voted Communist? Reconsidering the Social Bases of Radicalism in Interwar Poland." Jeffrey S. Kopstein; Jason Wittenberg. Slavic Review. Vol. 62, No. 1 (Spring, 2003), pp. 87-109.

"Theories and Facts: The Early Gothic Migrations." Thomas S. Burns. History in Africa Vol. 9 (1982), pp. 1-20.

"The Ruthenian Uniate Church in Its Historical Perspective." Ludvik Nemec. Church History. Vol. 37, No. 4 (Dec., 1968), pp. 365-388.

"Forest Associations of Southeast Lublin Province, Poland." I. Frydman; R. H. Whittaker. Ecology. Vol. 49, No. 5 (Sep., 1968), pp. 896-908.

"The Ideological, Political, and Economic Background of Pilsudski's Coup D' Etat of 1926." Joseph Rothschild. Political Science Quarterly. Vol. 78, No. 2 (Jun., 1963), pp. 224-244.

"The Problem of the Origin of the Slavs." T. Sulimirski. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. Vol. 75, No. 1/2 (1945), pp. 51-58.

Of course there are other sources using the Polish, Russian, Ukrainian, or Belarusian forms but for a region with a complex history, multiple languages, and overlapping boundaries, the English form is the best alternative.

LuiKhuntek 08:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see your point—Polesia is a loan name with the most typical Latin-English etymology. But being a proper name adopted from another language, neither version is really more "English" than the other. It's more common these days to use modern native names for some place names, rather than the "classic" names with an etymology rooted in second-hand adoption, colonialism, academic or church Latin, or something else. Polesia also doesn't seem to be the version most commonly used in English today.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying there doesn't seem to be a clear reason to switch to the Polesia spelling. —Michael Z. 2006-01-12 17:16 Z

Guys, I would like to take this opportunity to ask you to take a peek at naming proposal for Central/Eastern Europe, that has been designed to address the situations like this one. It's quite mature, but still in discussion (and obviously a controversial issue if you take all the name changes in CE Europe into account). I'm sure it could benefit from your input, and maybe would help us with Polesie, if you find it useful. --_Lysy^talk 21:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting progress over there. By the F Proposal, this article should be renamed Paleśsie if the English Polesia is not used. LuiKhuntek 08:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, Polesie is the most widely used form in English. Polesia is Latin and not in wide use. --_Lysy^talk 08:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polesie is Polish and not in wide use either (I asked 20 native English speakers and not one had ever heard of Polesie -- for that matter, they hadn't heard of Polesia, Paleśsie, or Polissia either...) LuiKhuntek 00:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If people think it a good idea, this move could be mentioned at the boards listed at Wikipedia:Eastern European Wikipedians' notice board to hopefully gain a larger base of opinions. Olessi 20:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These rivers are in Belarus now, hence the main spelling. Old Polish and Ukrainian spellings make sense to be added, since they can draw references from older docs. Since these rivers are very small, hardly there is a really established English spelling IMO. Mikkalai

But Bellorussian spelling is cyrillic. The english transcription is not established. Why don't we try traditional Polish translation, that is the only latin transcription that is well established for such a names? Cautious 13:06, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I have noticed that a number of articles about Belarus the spellings of places (cities, rivers) are given in transliteration from Belarussian, rather than from Russian as it was during the times of the Soviet Union. I attribute it to the reviving national self-consciousness. All the more, the Polish names are long gone and probably are smuggled here from Enc Brit 1911. As you might have noticed, even the name of the counry itself changed. :-) I see additional reasons to be cautious with respect to "new", Belarusian spellings, but I'd like to respect this tendency. A similar "renaming" from Russian into native happens in many post-Soviet republics. It is a big unfairness and bad luck when the changes Alma Ata -> Almaty or Kishinev -> Chisinau are welcome, but Polesie -> Palesse is frowned upon, often seen as a merely "distortion" of Polish or Russian. BTW the latter was one of reasons of the decline of the Belarussian language.

So in the cases of doubt, I'd suggest to give Belarussian, Polsih and Russian spellings, if only to "trap" possible new articles and references. Besides, it is encyclopedia, isnt it? After a reasonable time we'll see which name will be primary ad which turn into redirects. Mikkalai 16:04, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Russian name[edit]

Russian: Полесье, Pelesye

Should that be Пелесье/Pelesye, or Полесье/Polesye? —Michael Z. 2005-10-9 17:04 Z

Polessia[edit]

Polessia seems to be the English name, see http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001313/131319e.pdf, http://www.ramsar.org/ris/ris_belarus_pripyat.htm Xx236 08:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Polessia" is a brainless mixture of transliterations "Palessia" from belarusian and "polesie" from russian... OK. It seems I know the root of the prob. The ramsar site almost everywhere writes "Polesie" in the body of the text. However in the bibliography section there is "The problems of Polessia region" journal title, which is an illiterate translation of "Problemy Polessia" from Russian: failure to correctly translate the Russian genitive case: Polessie->Polessia `'юзырь:mikka 09:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

West Palyesian dialect group[edit]

The Belarusian language article introduces West Palyesian dialect group notion. Palyesian cannot be used together with Polesie, some integration is needed.Xx236 14:29, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed move to Polesie[edit]

@Oliszydlowski: This article has stood under the Polesia WP:TITLE since 2007. As you can see by the talk page, there are very, very old discussions as to the English WP:COMMONNAME for the region with absolutely nothing established conclusively one way or the other. I've restored the long standing title. Rather than engaging in Wikipedia:Page move wars, this is something to be properly discussed and established before bold moves. If you have reliably sourced evidence that Polesie is the common English language nomenclature, please present it. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:10, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you for reverting. I was unaware about the edit war from 2006 as I did not check the talk section. - Oliszydlowski, 00:26, 16 December 2015

My apologies for being so curt, Oliszydlowski. I think that I was taken aback by your move as I know you to be an experienced and good editor. Yes, I do appreciate that we've all miss things from time to time. Cheers (and season's greetings)! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:55, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Polesians[edit]

Shouldn't Poleshuks be merged into this article, as per scope? I don't think it's necessary to separate the two articles.--Zoupan 15:30, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It would make sense in terms of the length of the articles and the paucity of sources for Poleshuks (also currently evident on the Polish, Ukrainian and Russian Wikipedia articles), but not in terms of this article being about the region and the Poleshuks article being about the ethnic group. I guess my short answer would be that I'm really not sure. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

pel-/pal-[edit]

pel-/pal- means to flow [1].Xx236 (talk) 07:04, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]