Talk:Eğri Eyalet

Name

• "Egir Eyalet" (all languages) - 0 Takabeg (talk) 09:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  • "Eger Eyalet" - 5
  • "Eyalet of Egri" - 1
  • "Egri Eyaleti" - 7

--LK (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, let not start same discussion like with Budin Eyalet since same issues are applying here. This was Ottoman province, so historical Turkish name should be used for it. In this case, both versions, Egir and Egri would be acceptable, although we should use one that was more used in history when this province existed. Please do not rename this without understanding of complexity of naming issues in Central Europe. PANONIAN 15:40, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I know place names. And I oppose to Wikipedia:No original research. I know your double standard. Anyway we cannot find any samples for "Province of Egir", "Egir Province", "Eyalet of Egir", "Egir Eyalet". in google books. Takabeg (talk) 16:18, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Well then, what about Eğri? That name is well established in English sources: [1]. Would name "Eğri Eyalet" be acceptable? PANONIAN 18:40, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Also see quotation from this source: "Rumeli, Bosna and Egri and Timisvar were ruled as Ottoman provinces" - sometimes, sentences are made like this and google books search results would not show this source if you typed exact phrase "Egri province". PANONIAN 18:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I suggest moving the page to Eyalet of Eger, since the contemporary Ottoman Turkish name is never used by English languages sources.--LK (talk) 05:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with both, suggestion and opinion about usage in sources. As I pointed out in discussion about Budin Eyalet, usage of Hungarian name for this article could start revert wars related to naming issues in articles about Central Europe. Such sensitive issues should not be solved partially in a single article because this is very related to other articles. Therefore, we should find a name that satisfy two criteria: 1. that it is used in English, and 2. that its usage is not controversial. I think that in this case only name "Eğri Eyalet" might satisfy both criteria: it is not controversial, and it is used in English sources: [2]. Here are exact quotations from some of these sources: "Rumeli, Bosna and Egri and Timisvar were ruled as Ottoman provinces", "The list of provinces is not entirely accurate, as it omits the eyalets of Adana, Egri, Kanije and Silistre", "Other Hungarian provinces, such as Egri (Eger), Kanije (Kanizsa), Varad (Oradea) and Uyvar (Nov6 Z4mky)", "became a governor-general in the provinces of Trabzon (Trebizond; 1644), Egri" (The New Encyclopaedia Britannica), "and since Egri and Kanije do not feature as independent eyalets", "General Caraffa captured Egri, the capital of the province", ""When they arrived at the place called Kamenicko Pole, at the entrance of the province Egri", "nevertheless Egri kept its province status", "two new provinces were added to the existing beylerbeyliks of Budin and Temeşvar in the 16th century: Eğri (Eger in present-day northern Hungary) in 1596, and Kanije", etc, etc. These are clear evidences that name "Egri/Eğri" is used in English for this eyalet. Sources that using name "Egri/Eğri" for city (independently from its province) are even more numerous. "Eğri Eyalet" is best possible solution. PANONIAN 20:39, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• Support Eğri Eyalet (I prefer it over Egri Eyalet, we should use Turkish diacritics). It is the most common name(SamiraJ (talk) 07:53, 15 September 2011 (UTC))
• Oppose As before [3], but I would support the "Eğri Eyalet" solution. Adrian (talk) 12:39, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

End year

Is there any source that says that eyalet ceased to exist in 1661? According to these sources, it also existed after that year: [4], [5], [6], [7]. PANONIAN 10:08, 15 October 2011 (UTC)