Jump to content

Talk:Czech Republic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Largoplazo (talk | contribs) at 15:19, 1 October 2024 (Requested move 1 October 2024). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured article candidateCzech Republic is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 16, 2015Featured article candidateNot promoted




Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 August 2024

Change {{Redirect-distinguish-for|Czechia|Chechnya|other uses}} to {{Redirect-distinguish|Czechia|Chechnya}}{{Other uses|Czechia (disambiguation)|Czech Republic (disambiguation)}}

Reasoning: Changing the orders of such notices can make it more understandable, and there is less complexity in the template coding/parameters for the matter. ѕιη¢єяєℓу ƒяσм, ᗰOᗪ ᑕᖇEᗩTOᖇ 🏡 🗨 📝 23:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Bunnypranav (talk) 09:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:47, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you might expect, the new data doesn't show that much of a difference from the previous... still a massive lead for Czech Republic in usage: [1][2][3] I can't imagine there being a case for moving this any time soon, at least based on this evidence. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do I sense a malicious joy in that message? Well, firstly, it's clearly up to 2022, even though we know that in many sports (the main driver of usage) it started being used much later. And secondly, I followed the case of renaming Cote d'Ivoire, and there the dominance on Ngram for the renaming wasn't enough, they even mocked Ngram saying it only contains books, which is insignificant. Ngram is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition. The decreasing trend of the republic and the increasing trend of the non-republic can still be seen there, although at a linear pace it would take a long time. It's enough for the BBC and CNN to step up and it's done... Which might be tomorrow, maybe never, nevertheless, the case can be built on other foundations besides Ngram or two news sources. Chrz (talk) 22:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like to think I'm not malicious on this issue, but I did find it ironically humorous. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You need to know what kind of ngram sources are being combined. If these are 2+ year old books (and not online news), it's unlikely that they will contain a name that has only been used regularly since around 2022+. Especially in sports, you can expect phrases like 'Czechia wins' or even just 'Czechia'. Chrz (talk) 08:38, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just Google, last year, English
"Czechia wins" 776x, "Czech Republic wins" 1040x
"Czechia won" 911x, "Czech Republic won" 2730x
"Czechia has won" 340x, "Czech Republic has won" 691x
The sources would still need to be weighted, but the results are better, if you absolutely must use that phrase. Chrz (talk) 08:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another angle:[4] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"maybe never". Remember that. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BBC and CNN would be helpful, but I suspect it wouldn't satisfy you anyway. The argument can be made even without their involvement. I'm not sure why they would continue to stubbornly decline indefinitely. Unless, of course, the Czech Republic were to reconsider and no longer pursue it. Chrz (talk) 20:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does the Czech Republic pursue it? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the state registered it in as ~ many places as possible, I'd say it's true. A couple of years ago, you (not you you) mentioned here how 'Visit Czech Republic' hadn't been renamed yet, and how you still saw 'Czech Republic' on jerseys. So, the situation is different now. As an example. The transition to the new name is gradual, which was one of the complaints back then - that people don't like sudden changes. And they don't. It's not like other renamings because, as you know, this isn't a complete name change for the country and the 'old' name is still valid. Chrz (talk) 18:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

odd use of english

It is a welfare state with a should be

It has a welfare state with a 

or even

It has an advanced welfare state with a abelljms (talk) 10:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're mistaken. It is a welfare state. Largoplazo (talk) 12:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 October 2024

Czech RepublicCzechia – So, this is a perennial topic, but we said we would return to it in October to re-evaluate in the light of the Olympics, which is the latest in a long string of contexts in which we have recently seen a rapid change in usage.

Before we get into arguments on the details, can we perhaps first have clarity on the criteria? These are laid down at Wikipedia:Article titles. May I suggest that everybody read that before they comment here? I think we can save ourselves a lot of time if we all agree to follow policy. Past discussions have suffered a lot from misinformation about this.

Assuming that a subject has more than one title in reliable sources, the choice should be made primarily on five key criteria (shortcut WP:CRITERIA): recognizability (defined to mean that someone familiar with the topic will know what is meant), naturalness (meaning people will find it in a search), precision (what is most correct), concision (fewer words are better than more) and consistency (the article title follows a similar pattern to other articles on parallel topics).

The policy page then goes on to talk about the rule of thumb that it is helpful to find the most commonly recognizable name (shortcut WP:COMMONNAME), not as an end in itself, but because this will often shed light on what best meets the five criteria. The logic is that if experts in the field have come to a consensus on terminology, they will usually have alighted on something that is recognizable, natural, precise, concise and consistent. So for present purposes, common name means what is commonly used by relevant authoritative voices. It specifically does not mean we should follow whatever is statistically most commonly used by people on the street who may have limited familiarity with the topic, and the policy page warns against giving too much weight to Google hits and the likes. Rather, "[i]n determining which of several alternative names is most frequently used, it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies, and notable scientific journals."

I hope we can agree on those principles. So how do they apply to this case? Here’s my take. Czechia seems to me to fit all the five criteria, and on three of the five, it fits better than Czech Republic.

  1. recognizability – both options are equally recognizable; we’re way beyond the point where anyone might not know what is meant by Czechia.
  2. naturalness – this is subjective, but I think people will find us, so again I don’t think there is anything here to speak against the move.
  3. precision – this one matters. The most correct name for a country or a people is the name it chooses for itself. The Czech government has asked the English-speaking world to use Czechia. That fact trumps all others on the question of correctness.
  4. concision – one word rather than two is not a massive difference, but Czechia wins there too.
  5. consistency with other articles – this is the biggie. I can’t think of any other country for which Wikipedia uses the long, official-sounding name as the article title when there is also a short, colloquial one. Actually, the policy page on article names specifically gives the example that we should use North Korea, not Democratic People's Republic of Korea. So our article title Czech Republic is a total outlier.

So on precision and consistency there are strong arguments for a move, and the other three criteria certainly don’t speak against one.

I think those arguments have been made and won long ago. The reason we have not had a consensus to change is because of judgments about what is the common name. In my opinion these have been problematic for two reasons. First, it has been repeated here like a mantra that common name is all that matters – in fact the policy page is quite clear that common name is subsidiary to the five naming criteria. And secondly, it has been treated as though common name means what is statistically most frequently used – sorry, but if we based this on a vox pop on the streets of Birmingham or Chicago, we would end up moving back to Czechoslovakia! Google hit counts can be part of our thinking, but not a big part of it. Rather, common name means: what is used by people professionally involved with the topic. Here we have to be careful to look at recent sources, because usage is changing fast. The policy page gives us suggestions for how to decide this, and if we follow these, the argument for Czechia now being the common name is beginning to look strong:

  1. The usage of international organizations – it is significant that this is the policy page’s number-one pointer to common name, and here we have observed a landslide in the direction of Czechia in the last couple of years. It is now used by the diplomatic arm of the Czech government, the EU, the UN, NATO, the Council of Europe, the British Foreign Office, the American State Department, the CIA, the Olympics, UEFA, the Eurovision Song Contest, and many, many others.
  2. Media – I don’t have an overview here, so I’ll let someone else discuss that, but I’m certainly seeing it in the newspapers.
  3. Quality encyclopedias – I’m not sure there are any recent enough to reflect current changes.
  4. Geographic name servers – A cursory survey suggests these usually recognize Czechia. I think the likes of Google Maps would be highly relevant here, and it now uses Czechia.
  5. Scientific bodies and journals – My impressions are probably anecdotal, but the university people I know in Czech studies have been using Czechia for years. We see it prescribed in style-sheets for academic publishing.

I’m sure there is a lot of evidence in both directions that other people can add here, but please concentrate on these kinds of authorities. Common name is NOT about hit-counts.

Obviously even authorities who now prefer Czechia will still use Czech Republic wherever they would use French Republic or Republic of France. The point is not that the long form has gone, but that the short form is used when the short form of any other country would be used. I submit that for the most part, the relevant authorities have now reached that point. Doric Loon (talk) 04:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support move - I agree with everything that has been said. It should have been moved a long time ago. I find it strange that for other countries the transfer was automatic regardless of the WP:COMMONNAME rule (for example Eswatini or North Macedonia), which is not the only rule regarding names, but we have to come back to these debates every year regarding Czechia. The country is appearing more and more internationally under its geographical name, but due to pressure from a few select Wikipedians (still the same ones), Wikipedia continues to resist this. It's about time to finally take that step here on Wikipedia. Unloose (talk) 08:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support move - it makes sense. Nuvolet (talk) 10:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support move other sources like the United Nations and various international organizations have increasingly adopted "Czechia," and a Wikipedia article name change could align the page with this broader shift. Helveticus96 (talk) 11:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's absurd that this debate has gone on for so long. The distinction between Czechia and the Czech Republic should be clear by now. Wikipedia should consistently use the short form, Czechia. 78.80.80.192 (talk) 12:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's absurd is that people have raised this issue so many times for years while the prescribed conditions for making the change had clearly remained unmet. And all that mostly because they disagreed with the prescribed conditions and refused to be persuaded that if they don't like those conditions, the place to take that up is on the relevant guideline talk page, not here over and over and over. Largoplazo (talk) 13:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, and move Türkiye while we're at it. The nanosecond a person changes their name the article gets moved (correctly) because of NAMECHANGES, but when a country does so we always drag our feet. And it's not like it's a snap decision made by the country, it's an intentioned move by people with much more at stake than we do.--Ortizesp (talk) 13:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's because the nanosecond a person changes their name, the world picks up on the new name and uses it everywhere. If you're unhappy that the world doesn't similarly pick up on countries' new names, then go pick a fight with the world, not with Wikipedia for going by worldwide usage. Largoplazo (talk) 13:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support move per nom. I don't think we need to wait another year or two for the editors at CNN or BBC to finally switch to Czechia. Qertis (talk) 13:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awareness and use of Czechia as a common name has reached the point that this move makes sense now. Cashew.wheel (talk) 14:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]