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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels 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.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel articles
We are agreed that "Łazienki Bridge" is the proper English rendering. Why not give the bridge and this article their proper name, "Łazienki Bridge," and refer readers from the term "Łazienkowski Bridge?" The reader then finds the article—which would be under its proper name. Why perpetuate mistranslations? Nihil novi (talk) 17:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
WP should record, and use, the commonly used name(s): When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it, see WP:NCGN. 'Lazienki/Siekierki Bridge' simply are not used, no matter what purists-linguists may think. In my (not so humble) opinion it would be pointless to explain fine points of Polish grammar in the article on a bridge, readers do not come to the Łazienkowski Bridge article to learn about adjectival forms of Polish nouns. And, if this discussion is to continue, it would make sense to do so in one place only: it's the same point concerning two articles, so let's keep everything in one place. --Jotel (talk) 08:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Reply