Talk:Alexandroupoli

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Greece Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Alexandroupoli, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Mid	This article has been rated as a Mid priority article
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

Contents 1 Turkish name 2 Now that someone has determined to block the page 3 Unprotecting 4 Adding an external link 5 Other issues 6 Fair use rationale for Image:Alexandroupolis.jpg 7 Name in English

[edit] Turkish name

There's a convention put down by Wikipedia and we have to adhere to it wether we like it or not. It clearly states how the names should be place in the article. In this case they should be both in the first line. Regards DeliDumrul 17:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Mywayy's changes on the alternative names of the city, referred discussion and talk pages does not point any concensus on the naming of subject cities. Nonetheless, we should be arranging our articles by the book not by one group or the others desire. Therefore, not seek a concensus when there is already a convention. DeliDumrul 00:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

What makes u believe that we should have both names in the first line of this article? --Hectorian 00:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

See Edirne. ;) —Khoikhoi 00:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Some users are arguing that if Istanbul does not have the Greek name in the first line then the Greek cities should not have Turkish names either. There's a long discussion going on in the Istanbul talk page about what should be done about it. Moving the alternative name in this article with an argument based on what is done in Istanbul article would be a little like performing a retribution (pls excuse my choice on the word, I couldn't find a better way to point it out). I don't understand why we don't go by the book but try to find ways around it. DeliDumrul 00:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Speaking about Istanbul, i really cannot understand why it bothers some users so much if the greek name is mentioned in the first line... What they may think? that this would make the city less turkish?! i really see no reason to have the turkish name in this article's first line if we don't put the greek in Istanbul's first line... And if the reason, according to some editors, is that 'the case is later on discussed' or 'there is another article about the name, i am ready to create articles about the different names in other languages of the greek places in Western Thrace and the Aegean, or to create paragraphs mentioning them in the existing articles... Lets be honest, no 'book' or 'rule' prohibits the mentioning of the name 'Κωνσταντινούπολη' in the first line of Istanbul. --Hectorian 00:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm copying this from Istanbul talk page, just to address your comment on the 'book':

From the second paragraph of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names);

Relevant foreign language names[3] are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages, i.e.: (Armenian: name1, Belarusian: name2, Czech: name3). Alternatively, all alternative names can be moved to and explained in a names section immediately following the lead. In this case, the redundant list of the names in the article's first line should be replaced with the following text: (known also by several alternative namesNames). Once such a section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line. .

What I'm trying to say is that there is a page for the alternative names already. As the convention suggests the first line should not contain other names if such a section (in this case a section would be too long to include in the article itself) is created.

Having said that, we shouldn't discuss Istanbul on this page. DeliDumrul 01:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

They're basically saying a separate section for the alternate names is necessary once there are too many in the lead (see Nagorno-Karabakh for example. If all you need to add to the article is just the Turkish and Bulgarian name, then you don't need new section. See Gdańsk, for example. —Khoikhoi 01:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

In Gdansk, Poles and German editors agreed, in such a degree that Gdańsk has been used a lot as an example... but of course, in the case discussed, we have to do with Istanbul... and some editors will never allow the greek name been there...

To DeliDumrul: u were the one to begin the discussion here, and u mentioned Istanbul first. now, u are asking not to talk about it here... --Hectorian 01:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I mentioned Istanbul in response to Mywayyy's edit summary. I shouldn't have, my bad. DeliDumrul 03:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Now that someone has determined to block the page

Would that someone correct the word "inhabits" in the population statistics to "inhabitants". Further evidence that blocking pages just leaves an article in an unworthy state. Carlossuarez46 21:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unprotecting

This article seems to have been protected over a small dispute. There has been no discussion in several weeks. I'm unprotecting. --Tony Sidaway 22:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adding an external link

i wish to add an external link concerning Alexandroupoli's history [www.emthrace.org] thank you. -unsigned 07-February-2007

01-April-2007: I noted the above webpage-URL links the Ethnological Museum of Thrace, and has an English webpage ("http://www.emthrace.org/en/"), so I added it to the article in External links. -Wikid77 21:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other issues

[ Place untitled issues here. -Wikid77]

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Alexandroupolis.jpg

Image:Alexandroupolis.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name in English

I am a bit perplexed why the article uses the transliteration of the Greek name rather than the common English name for the city. Is there a reason, or that's just how the article started out? A spot check of guidebooks, history books, and atlases on my shelf shows only Alexandroupolis. (often with an accent mark) Google returns about 5-6 times as many hits for Alexandroupolis as for Alexandroupoli. Can we move the article to the English name? Jd2718 00:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Alexandroupoli is the way all of my maps translate the name from Greek to English. It's basically a direct translation. It could go either way, the city of Alexandroupoli spells it both ways on its city website:[1]!!!! So...?!?! ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 01:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify - I canvassed the 4 or so most recent serious looking editors from this page. I have offered an opinion, but if there is consensus to keep, then there's consensus to keep. And thanks, I looked at the website. Both ways, huh? Jd2718 01:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Both ways in the fact that in Greek at the top of the page, they spell it as Alexandroupolis with an s and when you click on the English version of the page, it says Alexandroupoli in the text fields. ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 14:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

That's due to possessive vs. non-possessive uses. The use at the top of the page is "Municipality of Alexandroupoli" ("Dimos Alexandroupolis"), which in Greek (unlike English) is a possessive construction, so it gets the possessive form, Alexandroupolis. You might have a house stin Alexandroupoli ("in Alexandroupoli"), but would admire the architecture tis Alexandroupolis ("of Alexandroupoli"). Similar things happen to other cities' names; for example, the Municipality of Thessaloniki becomes "Dimos Thessalonikis". --Delirium (talk) 00:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the bit of Greek grammar. However, the difference is, how is it commonly referred to in English? Alexandroupolis is most common. Thessaloniki is most common. It's not our job to change usage. Jd2718 (talk) 00:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I agree with that. Clearly -is is the more common name in English, and so I'd support that move. That's due to a completely different bit of grammar; the word polis has become poli in modern Greek, but English has mostly retained the -polis transliterations (e.g. acropolis is acropoli in modern Greek, but not in English). Sorry for the digression; I got caught up in explaining why the official website seemed to be inconsistent in its usage. --Delirium (talk) 00:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)