Talk:Zhuravlyovka, Belgorod Oblast

Requested move 20 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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre (talk) 09:42, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

---

• Zhuravlyovka, Belgorod Oblast → Zhuravlevka, Belgorod Oblast
• Zhuravlyovka, Amur Oblast → Zhuravlevka, Amur Oblast
• Zhuravlyovka, Republic of Bashkortostan → Zhuravlevka, Republic of Bashkortostan
• Zhuravlyovka → Zhuravlevka

– WP:COMMONNAME for these three village stubs (plus one disambig page) that each have fewer than 20 edits, and no previous discussion. The proposed spelling is supported by reliable sources as summarized by a Google Books Ngram chart (Google says “we only consider ngrams that occur in at least 40 books”),[1] and searches per WP:SET:

• “Zhuravlevka” -Wikipedia Page 18 of about 7,490 results (175 actually shown)
• “Zhuravlyovka” -Wikipedia 10 results
• “Zhuravlëvka” -Wikipedia 6 results
• “Zhuravliovka” -Wikipedia 1 result

And Google Scholar results:

• “Zhuravlevka” -Wikipedia Page 31 of 317 results
• “Zhuravlyovka” -Wikipedia 10 results
• “Zhuravlëvka” -Wikipedia 0
• “Zhuravliovka” -Wikipedia 1 result

 —Michael Z. 20:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support per well-researched nomination. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, the number of hits is insufficient to determine what COMMONNAME is, and we need top use WP:RUS. The two above users are on a crusade in an editing area they have very little understanding about.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:48, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

  Sorry, there seems to be a crucial typo there, we need to stop and use that or stop using it? --Joy (talk) 08:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

  He means we need to use it. But it is a flawed personal essay and not a guideline, so we do not need to. It should be deprecated and replaced by a standardized romanization system selected on its merits, to give a sensible result when there is no clear common name. But that’s academic, because it is not be used at all when there is one most commonly used name in reliable sources, which is mandated by the policy.  —Michael Z. 15:26, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

This is then a known difference between common English transliteration and common Russian pronunciation? --Joy (talk) 08:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

It’s akin to Gorbachev < Горбачёв and Khrushchev < Хрущёв. The Cyrillic Russian letter ё, often written е, is sometimes transliterated as Latin ë, rarely as yo or jo, but most often as e (whether directly, or by dropping the diacritic as in the widely used modified Library of Congress system). See the table in Romanization of Russian. English pronunciation seems to follow from spelling, except by English-speakers familiar with Russian. Anyway, that’s an explanation rather than a rationale for the move, which is mandated by the policy COMMONNAME. —Michael Z. 15:18, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

• Blanket oppose any renaming of obscure Russian-language terms contrary to WP:RUS based on alleged English COMMONNAME. I might support changing the default transliteration of ⟨ё⟩ to e rather than yo (despite the latter being more phonetically correct), but going piecewise like this is futile (and borders on disruption). No such user (talk) 08:30, 30 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.