Talk:Bieszczady Mountains

Requested move

The name "Bieszczady Mountains" is clearly a misnomer. This is analogous to "Himalayas Mountains" - there is no such thing. Either "Himalayas" or "Himalayan Mountains". The same is in Polish: either "Bieszczady" or "Bieszczadzkie Mountains". As the first option is far more popular, per WP:COMMONNAME guideline I suggest renaming this article to "Bieszczady". I'd like to hear a second opinion, though. --Kubanczyk (talk) 22:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

While copy editing the article on Baligród it struck me as strange that this article's title is not Anglicized. It seemed so obvious that I didn't bother to discuss my moving it to its English name. It was reverted with a challenge to me to explain as to why I made that move. I apologize for that mistake (not discussing it), but I'm curious as to why the name of this part of the Western Beskids is not called just that. To be clear, the name of the Bieszczady National Park article makes sense. This one is confusing. Dr. Dan (talk) 05:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

What are you actually asking? You still aren't clear why Western Beskids is the wrong name for this article? Or are you proposing some other name? This article certainly isn't about the Western Beskids, unless that's some kind of Ukrainian terminology, but even so it shouldn't be used here as it would be highly misleading, given how the Beskids are defined. (The Bieszczady are described as being in the western part of the eastern Beskids, at least in Polish terminology, and since they're principally in Poland we shouldn't be using other terminology that conflicts with that.)

I'd be happy with the old suggestion above, to move the page to just Bieszczady, though I don't consider it essential.--Kotniski (talk) 10:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

It's really more about the English language. Beskids is English, "Bieszczady" is not. Alps is English, "Alpen", "Alpy", "Aups" are not. Shouldn't the title be in English as elsewhere in Encyclopedias with the other foreign language names names following that? Dr. Dan (talk) 17:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Well yes, but we already have an article Beskids. Bieszczady is only a small part of Beskids, and I don't think it has a common English name other than Bieszczady.--Kotniski (talk) 18:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

It does, the "Western Beskids". I personally have no intention of pressing it any further. Spent plenty of time in the Bieszczady and had a good time there. If there is no desire of the community at large to merge everything into one concise article, consider it a dead issue on my part. Dr. Dan (talk) 01:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Who calls it the Western Beskids? I can't imagine why anyone would call it that, except Ukrainians who have decided that the Beskids stop at their border (like the Poles say "western Pomerania" to mean the western part of their part (i.e. the eastern part) of Pomerania). It would be highly misleading to adopt this terminology as a basis for an article title, since English speakers are more likely to be familiar with the more extensive meaning of Beskids (which has them stretch far more westwards than the Bieszczady).--Kotniski (talk) 08:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

(OD) In that case how do you feel about merging this article into the Beskids article? Dr. Dan (talk) 15:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't see the point - this seems quite an extensive independent article on a very notable mountain range, and I'm sure much more could be added to it (it could use a lot of tidying up as well, of course). Why do you think it might be better merged?--Kotniski (talk) 15:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps it's too extensive. The Beskids (a 600km range of which this is quite a small part), article is quite paltry in comparison. Dr. Dan (talk) 17:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bieszczady Mountains. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070127115156/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Battles_Of_The_Dunajec-San to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Battles_Of_The_Dunajec-San
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060419045046/http://www.escapeartist.com/efam/79/Hidden_Europe_Bieszczady_Poland.html to http://www.escapeartist.com/efam/79/Hidden_Europe_Bieszczady_Poland.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:30, 5 December 2017 (UTC)