Talk:Leonid Utesov

Untitled

Tis fragment was deleted by me: "His rendition of the popular song "Shalandy" (also known as "Boats full of mallet") by composer Nikita Bogoslovsky, was expremely popular in Russia, albeit the song was banned by the Soviet authorities. During the 1950s and 1960s, Utyosov was censored by the Soviet authorities, and his performances were limited." Utyosov never sang this song! All points in that text concerns to another Soviet artist - Mark Bernes. - Aleksandr Vasilyev (Александр Васильев), musicologist, Kiev, Ukraine. (I am registered user of Russian Wiki.)95.132.72.88 (talk) 08:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I seem to recall that he mentions it in his third autobiography, but it certainly was not a signature song for him, and it was definitely not banned by the Soviet authorities. Bernes even produced a 78 rpm of the song during the Great Patriotic War backed by Aleksandr Tsfasman and his jazz orchestra. Bjberesf (talk) 12:50, 22 October 2017 (UTC)Bjberesf

File:Utesov.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Utesov.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 5 January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:57, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 9 January 2023

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Though it was generally agreed that the "Utesov" spelling does not accurately reflect the pronunciation of the subject's name, a consensus emerged that "Utesov" was nevertheless the WP:COMMONNAME. (non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:16, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

---

Leonid Utyosov → Leonid Utesov – WP:COMMONNAME, per Google Books Ngram, and also the only English-language source cited in the article.[1]  —Michael Z. 21:49, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Strongly object, reject vigorously! I'm Russian, and I insist: Утёсов (NOT Утесов!) must be pronounced as Utyosov, or Utiosov if someone like. The word "утЁс" / utiOs means cliff or crag. There is not word "утЕс" / "utEs" in Russian! - Александр Васильев (talk) 22:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

There’s one English-language book cited in this article.[2] It spells the name Utesov.  —Michael Z. 15:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

BUT! There is a link to IMDb in the same article. And this resource writes "Utyosov"! See: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0882607/ - Александр Васильев (talk) 12:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

You’re right. If we click through, we see it is an excerpt of “IMDb Mini Biography By: Steve Shelokhonov,” who appears to be a Hollywood journalist. This constitutes a second data point making the cited sources 50-50.

But it doesn’t change that the Ngram chart shows the proposed spelling has been the majority usage for thirty or forty years. If we chart an expression showing the two spellings as percentages of the total, it’s even clearer.[https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Leonid+Utesov%2F%28Leonid+Utesov%2BLeonid+Utyosov%29%2CLeonid+Utyosov%2F%28Leonid+Utesov%2BLeonid+Utyosov%29&year_start=1940&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3j  —Michael Z. 15:53, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

It should be also noted that while IMDb may provide more literal transliterations of Russian names, those transliterations are not necessarily the ones that are best known or most frequently used. From its creation in August 2005, until it was moved to Ivan Mosjoukine in July 2013, the main title header of Mosjoukine's English Wikipedia entry used IMDb's transliteration — Ivan Mozzhukhin which, while more literal, did not represent his on-screen billing in any country where his name was billed using the Latin alphabet. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 10:11, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

However there is a difference: Mozzhukhin is a right English version, and Mosjoukine is a right French version, while Utyosov or most contemporary Utiosov is a right English version, but Utesov is a perverted version! - Александр Васильев (talk) 13:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Well then English spelling and romanization are perverted practices. What can we do?  —Michael Z. 16:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

We can make a decision using our brain instead of foolish protocolary rules! - Александр Васильев (talk) 14:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Would our brain move foolish Potemkin village to Patyomkin village?  —Michael Z. 06:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Don't confuse penis and finger. "Potemkin" (village, ship) is and old traditional way or this surname. One can't use the same rools for traditional names and contemporary ones. - Александр Васильев (talk) 10:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Can you point out a style guide or romanization system that recommends using different rules for the name of a person died 1795 and one died 1982? Or Gorbachev (not titled Gorbachyov), died 2022?  —Michael Z. 06:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

weird, transliterating 'Ё' as just 'e' seems like a mistake—blindlynx 21:34, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Well "Горбачёв" and "Хрущёв" are usually transliterated as Gorbachev and Khrushchev (though still pronounced as Gorbachyov). Maybe Cyrillic "ё" is sometimes just transliterated as Latin "ë" rather than "yo" but because English does not use diacritics, it is missing here as a result. Even in Russian sometimes it is just written as "е". That is just my guess. Mellk (talk) 22:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

The most common transliteration method in English academic and popular-academic publishing and in library cataloguing is the ALA-LC romanization. In library catalogues and bibliographies, the full method is used, where Леонид Осипович Утёсов is rendered as Leonid Osipovich Utësov. In the body text of books, diacritics are usually dropped, giving us Leonid Osipovich Utesov. (I understand it’s common to write the Russian ё as е anyway, so I don’t see why one should object so strongly.)

That is why this is the most commonly used spelling.  —Michael Z. 04:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

There’s a survey of romanization methods at Romanization of Russian#Transliteration table. As you can see by the line for the Russian letter ё, it is romanized as ë, e, or sometimes yë in nearly every system, certainly all of the ones that have been regularly used widely in reliable English-language sources. The BSI British Standard system even says “diacritics may be omitted when back-transliteration is not required,” leading to even more use of e. —Michael Z. 21:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support per link submitted within the nomination, although I sympathize with the objections presented by Александр Васильев. In his 1913 play, Great Catherine: Whom Glory Still Adores, George Bernard Shaw depicts the name of Prince Potemkin as "Patiomkin", insisting that in order for the name to be pronounced correctly, its transliteration should be as close as possible. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:05, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

  Shaw’s POV on spelling went much farther: see Shavian alphabet. Turns out English chose its own prevailing spelling and pronunciation of Potemkin and other terms and names.  —Michael Z. 21:22, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

While I appreciate Shaw's proposals for improved transliteration and likewise take into consideration comments by Mellk, above, the prevailing transliteration from Russian into English is what it is and my support vote does of course stand. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:57, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.