Wikipedia

Talk:Kstovo

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

ETymology

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Seems to be Kstovo < Крьстово (from word "cross") Etymology given is from 1852 German-language source which is dubius for me (and out-of-date). 77.40.73.2 (talk) 05:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

The "cross" hypothesis is one of the two existing explanations. I don't believe it is known for sure which version is correct. Feel free to add it as well if you have a source to back it up. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 4, 2010; 13:15 (UTC)
There are many Slavic settlements with this name: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kstovo_%28inhabited_locality%29 It's very dubious that all of them stem from a Mordvin name. The origin from "ksty" sounds like an old folk etymology that was formed before modern science of historical linguistics developed. 77.40.17.204 (talk) 14:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Requested move

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved (primary usage). I moved Kstovo to List of places called Kstovo. DrKiernan (talk) 09:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Kstovo, Nizhny Novgorod Oblast → Kstovo – (while moving Kstovo to Kstovo (inhabited locality)). Kstovo, Nizhny Novgorod Oblast is the only city with the name "Kstovo", and the only place with that name shown on e.g. wall maps or in standard one-volume atlases of Russia, or listed in paper encyclopedias; it is (virtually) the only one occurring on Google Books. All other places listed at the set index page Kstovo as it stands now are small villages (or, in the case of the one near Rybinsk, a suburban neighborhood), are shown only on very detailed (topo-level) maps, and all put together have a population much smaller than Kstovo, Nizhny Novgorod Oblast. There is probably a reason while all of them are red links now! Vmenkov (talk) 06:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

  • Support per nom but oppose the atrocious "inhabited locality" tag. Move it to Kstovo (disambiguation) per usual practice. —  AjaxSmack  22:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
    We can't, since it's not a disambiguation page. It's a set index. As a dab page, it cannot exist per our atrocious guidelines. Helpful, eh?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); November 8, 2012; 23:47 (UTC)
    I agree with Ëzhiki that Wikipedia:DABRL#Red_links is indeed ridiculous. Certainly the list of populated places called "Kstovo" is very useful (e.g., because one occasionally finds a documents like this), and whatever one says, it really is not too different from a disambig page (well, a disambig page with sources). At the same time I'd agree with AjaxSmack that "Kstovo (inhabited locality)" is indeed a rather weird name for an article; but if we're prohibited to call it Kstovo (disambiguation), maybe it should be just List of populated places called Kstovo, or maybe even List of geographical objects called Kstovo (in case a pond or a swamp somewhere goes by that name too). :-) -- Vmenkov (talk) 03:28, 9 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
    There is no such thing as a disambiguation page with sources :) From the same well of wisdom where DABRL originates, it's perfectly OK to include blue links to unreferenced substubs or to artificially jam a mention of a redlinked entry into an existing article, but it's not OK to include red links which have a developed counterpart on some other wiki or are/can be sourced. "Violations" are routinely "cleaned up"; that is to say castrated by removing unqualifying red links altogether. Go figure.
    As for the "list of..." titles, the problem with those is that they actually make the sets harder to find, a pain to link to, and make catching already existing incoming links (which are never to "list of..." :)) impossible. The "inhabited locality" moniker is typically used when a set index is contrasted with something of the same name but of a different type (e.g., a district, a river, a pond, an air base, etc.) or when, as is going to be the case here, the main title is taken by a "primary meaning". Parenthetical disambiguation is the most common approach for distinguishing entries of different types on the English Wikipedia, so I don't really understand why it is a problem here? All sets falling under the two circumstances I described are titled using either "(rural locality)" or "(inhabited locality)"; the latter is used when the set includes both urban and rural entities. Furthermore, these terms coincide with the terminology we already use across all of the articles about the inhabited localities in Russia.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); November 9, 2012; 02:08 (UTC)
    Here's an idea. Use the sources listed and create a stub on one or two of the Kstovos. If you know Russian, use ru:Кстово (Вологодская область) or ru:Кстово (Рыбинский район Ярославской области) to get you started. Throw them, the redlinks, and the rajon together into a dab page (or, better yet, use the current Kstovo page) and you have a dab page that will withstand deletion attempts. Put the remaining references in the talk page for future use by other editors and to justify inclusion of the redlinks. Sure, it takes work, but not much more than these discussions (but also notice I'm not volunteering). —  AjaxSmack  03:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
    Problem is, there are hundreds of pages like this. Yours is not a sustainable or scalable solution (in no small part because you are not the only one "not volunteering" :)). And as a matter of fact, the very reason behind the existence of set index articles is to prevent proliferation of useless unreferenced substubs. Articles should be created when there is enough material to sustain them, not to pander to bureaucratic whims of the enforcers of poorly designed guidelines.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); November 13, 2012; 13:10 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kstovo. 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:

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) 23:59, 9 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kstovo. 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:

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) 23:02, 1 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kstovo. 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:

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) 04:01, 13 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kstovo&oldid=1212088506"