Talk:Maskoŭskaja (Minsk Metro)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Minsk-Metro-Moskovskaya-01.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:06, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 3 April 2020

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 buidhe 20:25, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Maskowskaya (Minsk Metro) → Maskoŭskaja (Minsk Metro) – This transliteration is used only in the English Wikipedia. Чаховіч Уладзіслаў (talk) 12:24, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support - Agrees with English transliteration on the official map and second-hand guides[1][2]. Note that this does disagree with the article Maskowskaya line. -- Netoholic @ 14:12, 3 April 2020 (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.

Requested move 21 February 2024

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: not moved. Per opposes, Previous move was done according to reliable sources. Wikipedia reflects the real world, not what some obscure guideline thinks we ought to be printing. – robertsky (talk) 03:08, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

---

• Maskoŭskaja (Minsk Metro) → Maskowskaya (Minsk Metro)
• Uschod → Uskhod (Minsk Metro)
• Uručča (Minsk Metro) → Uruchcha (Minsk Metro)
• Jubiliejnaja plošča (Minsk Metro) → Yubilyeynaya ploshcha (Minsk Metro)
• Kavaĺskaja Slabada (Minsk Metro) → Kavalskaya Slabada (Minsk Metro)

– Per WP:BELARUSIANNAMES, this should follow BGN/PCGN romanization. Most of the other articles on the stations already follow this. Mellk (talk) 01:37, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

• Note that "uskhod" literally means "east" and there are various settlements with this name so disambiguation is necessary. Mellk (talk) 01:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nomination. Since English language does not have accents and diacritics and Belarus primarily uses Cyrillic, English transliterations from languages that do not use the Latin alphabet should likewise not use accents or diacritics. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 07:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
• Support per WP:BELARUSIANNAMES, which advises us to use BGN/PCGN. Note that this was moved the other way in 2020, based on the fact that the official map uses Instruction romanization. 162 etc. (talk) 17:22, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Previous move was done according to reliable sources. New request has no sources in it at all. And WP:BELARUSIANNAMES cannot supersede WP:RS. --Red Winged Duck (talk) 09:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

  Of the sources cited in the 2020 RM, one is WP:RSPRIMARY, one is WP:QUESTIONABLE, and one is a dead link. 162 etc. (talk) 17:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

  The belarus.by website uses the names in Russian, but it is clear that there is no common name here and as a result, we must default to BGN/PCGN romanization of Belarusian. Mellk (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

  This link also says: "Charts of the Minsk metro lines are available in railway cars. Names of the stations are written in Belarusian and transliterated into the Belarusian variety of the Latin alphabet." So your proposal is to replace names used in real life with artificial names not used at all. --Red Winged Duck (talk) 08:18, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

  That transliteration rule applies to those charts, not to Wikipedia. Mellk (talk) 08:21, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. As Red Winged Duck points out, the previous move relied on actual sourced evidence, whereas there is no 3rd party evidence supplied here at all. Wikipedia reflects the real world, not what some obscure guideline thinks we ought to be printing.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:18, 17 March 2024 (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.