Talk:Czech Republic

Bohemia is not Czechia

Frequent mistake is present in the English text, claimimg that ...[Czechia is] historically known as Bohemia... In fact, the territory of Czechia is composed of Bohemia, Moravia and part of Silesia. These are historical countries, nowadays without any authonomy nor reflected in recent administrative borders. Still, they maintain some cultural and language specifics, and many people feel strong affiliation to "their" country. Particularly the inhabitians of Bohemia sometimes call the whole country as Bohemia (Čechy), which is often felt as haughty by Moravians and Silesians. On the other hand, some people refuse using the newly established term "Czechia" (in Czech: Česko), as they incorrectly consider it as an English translation of "Čechy" (correctly: Bohemia). 81.19.4.195 (talk) 12:44, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

The keyword is "historically" - before the 20th century the whole Czech lands were known in English as "Bohemia", as it explains in the reference. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Even more important than "historically" is that this is talking about ENGLISH usage, not Czech. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Maybe this issue should be mentioned in the FAQ? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I am absolutely dumbfounded that this question keeps coming up. I would think that the obvious fact that English and Czech are different languages would be enough to explain it. User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 17:53, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Many countries have different historical names. By this kind of logic we should write "historically known as Ruthenia" in Ukraine article and "historically known as Muscovy" in Russia article. --UA0Volodymyr (talk) 09:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

If that "historically" has already surpassed the psychological threshold of 100 years (1918 Czechoslovakia), I guess it is acceptable to omit this information from the introduction and include it in later sections. Chrz (talk) 10:47, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:LEAD, that's not unreasonable. I don't see a lot about Bohemia in the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:02, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

The country was known as Bohemia for more than 1000 years until 1918. If we have Persia or Siam in the lead sections of Iran and Thailand, Bohemia should be in the lead section here. Qertis (talk) 10:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:OTHERCONTENT only means so much, but those are not unreasonable comparisons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:15, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Both Iran and Thailand were renamed as existed states. Bohemia before 1918 and Czechoslovakia after are completely different state units. UA0Volodymyr (talk) 11:32, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Wouldn't that argue against the idea of Czechia as a "timeless name", then? User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

"timeless name"?! UA0Volodymyr (talk) 15:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

It's an argument that proponents of using Czechia in Englsh often make. That Czechia applies equally to the entire past of the country.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 17:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Bohemia and Czechia are two names of the same country. Both were used interchangeably for centuries. It is explained in the source article. Qertis (talk) 21:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

But it's not used currently. A bunch of the names were used for Ukraine, along with just "Ukraine" until 1945, when the UkSSR was completely recognized by its UN membership: Little Russia, Ruthenia, Malorossiya etc. etc. UA0Volodymyr (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to bring it up and discuss here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ukraine, this is not the place. Qertis (talk) 21:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

No. I just don't think that this kind of old name should be mentioned in lead at all. UA0Volodymyr (talk) 21:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

From here: "When this title is a name, significant alternative names for the topic should be mentioned in the article. These may include alternative spellings, longer or shorter forms, historical names, and significant names in other languages." Qertis (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Anyway that's not a name of Czechia as a current country, just of the historical state on this territory and the part of the Austro-Hungary. UA0Volodymyr (talk) 22:05, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

It's the same country. If it hadn't changed its name and still was called Bohemia/Bohemian Republic (translated into Czech literally as "Česká republika"), you wouldn't even think to question it. Qertis (talk) 00:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Siam 1939, Iran 1935. Ancient too... Chrz (talk) 14:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

That's an article about the current country, not a part of the Austro-Hungary before 1918. Ukrainians in the Western Ukraine controlled by Austro-Hungary also were called Ruthenians before 1918. UA0Volodymyr (talk) 11:26, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand that revert. Among today's readers, few will seek this state under the name Bohemia, which has not been known for over 100 years and thus practically no one could have recorded it under that name. One can learn about its historical name in a different chapter rather than immediately in the introduction. Particularly if it's not relevant to the article's text. Chrz (talk) 14:32, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Before the 1918-1945 and creation of the Ukrainian People's Republic and Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and second's UN membership the land of Ukraine were called by a variety of names, from "Ruthenia" to "Little Russia". UA0Volodymyr (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Basically, every article here on Wikipedia and elsewhere concerning the history of Czechia/Czech Republic uses the name, including the entire History section in this article titled Bohemia covering those 1000 years of the country's history. Anyone interested in the Czech Republic, even briefly touching upon its history, will encounter this name. However, Bohemia and Czechia/Czech Republic do not share an etymological connection or similarity, so for someone unfamiliar, this can be confusing, and therefore, it is appropriate to clarify this connection right in the lead section. Qertis (talk) 21:50, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

In the context of the comparison with Persia and Siam on one hand and Muscovy and Ruthenia on the other, one consideration is that there are still a reasonable number of people alive who knew of the former two as Persia and Siam whereas everyone who ever knew the latter two as Muscovy and Ruthenia is dead. The situation with Bohemia today is nearly the same as that of the latter two. So if the purpose of mentioning an earlier name in the lead is to indicate "this might be the name you know it by", no one, or virtually no one, alive today knows the Czech Republic as Bohemia. Largoplazo (talk) 12:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, we might have read A Scandal in Bohemia. Though TBH, at the time I read it, I don't think I gave any thought to that Böhmen was something like Tjeckoslovakien. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:33, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

That story illustrates a difference between Bohemia and Muscovy. The name Bohemia (like Siam and Persia) has a presence in Anglophone culture that Muscovy (and Ruthenia) lacks. -- User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:48, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

"Siam

is gonna be the witness

to the ultimate test

of cerebral fitness." Anglophone culture. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:20, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

The King and I. Siamese twin. Siamese cat -- User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:26, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Khajidha "Our ship hath touched upon the deserts of Bohemia.". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Renaming to the Czechia

Can I change the title of the article to one-word Czechia? Considering that this country is under this name on the websites of the UN or the EU and several others, I think it is time to do it. Czech politicians are also using this designation more and more often on foreign trips. I've also seen it on TV during some sport. Even the article on the Czech Wikipedia has the one-word title "Česko". https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%8Cesko

So I would do that if it's not a problem. Andypos (talk) 01:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

You would need to start a formal move discussion as prescribed at WP:RM. If you do that, you should understand that

• This change has been proposed numerous times and has continued to fail to obtain a consensus.
• The criteria on which the decision should be made are primarily those expressed at WP:COMMONNAME. So a move nomination should be based on a solid guidelines-based demonstration that the criteria for a name change have been met. In particular:
  • It's not a matter of showing that some or many uses of "Czechia" exist but that they predominate. Maybe they do now, but that needs to be assessed.
  • Other sources, like the UN and the EU and sports programming have their criteria for reflecting new names. Wikipedia has it's own criteria.
  • Czechia was using "Česko" for itself years before it even came up with "Czechia" for the English-speaking world, so that isn't relevant.
• You should familiarize yourself with previous discussions to avoid treading ground already trodden. See the latest one at Talk:Czech Republic/Archive 12#Closure of "Rename to Czechia" discussion.
• That was only eight months ago, and these discussions are draining to all who have this article on their watchlists. It would be respectiful of other people's time and effort to wait a while longer. The situation just isn't likely to change that dramatically that fast, and there's no obligation to catch relative usage slipping over the threshold the instant it happens.

Largoplazo (talk) 02:32, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. Andypos (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Btw, just noticing the heading of this thread, I do not think you will get agreement to change the article-title to "the Czechia". ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Can I suggest we don't revisit this until after this year's Olympics? The situation is actually changing very fast, and reporting on the Czech participation in Paris is likely to give a very up-to-date metric for common usage. Let's wait and see what that looks like. Doric Loon (talk) 09:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Make it 6-12 months after, but yes, it will be interesting to see what impact that has. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, agree, as well as the Olympics this year we also have Euro 2024, another ice hockey championship, and an EU parliament election, so hopefully that'll provide enough contemporary sources for people to move on from the Google ngram that only goes up to 2019. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

If these events have enough effect on the google trends, that could happen. It would be nice if ngram could be arsed to update, though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:32, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, the IIHF began using Czechia in their 2022 tournaments. GoodDay (talk) 23:35, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

According to WP:COMMONNAME and WP:OFFICIALNAMES we have to wait for the majority of reliable secondary sources (in English language) to use Czechia instead of Czech Republic. I support the use of Czechia as soon as possible (with a new check every 6/12 month).

• Czechia became an official name for the English language along with the original Czech Republic in April 2016.
• The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs also just published this guideline in January 2024, in order to instruct which form of the country's name ("Czechia" or "the Czech Republic") is preferred for international use - and in what contexts.

I recommend we all start promoting this guideline to be respected towards all reliable media in the secondary ressource field. The guideline instructs that we shall all start to use the country name Czechia instead of Czech Republic in all places of published international text in English language - except for "treaty texts" where the long version name "The Czech Republic" is still preferred. Danish Expert (talk) 17:19, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The guideline from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic is not to instruct foreigners, it's about use "when presenting the Czech Republic abroad." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Correct. I just removed the word "foreigners" from my reply. Danish Expert (talk) 17:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

You said "I recommend we all start promoting this guideline to be respected towards all reliable media in the secondary ressource field." Do you, for example, want Wikipedians to complain to The Times when they use "Czech Republic" in their articles? Btw, WP:REDACT is good guidance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I would promote existence of the Czechia guideline to all news papers, as some are not aware of this new guideline, but not complain. It is hard to complain, when the name of the Embassy of the Czech Republic in Washington D.C. still has not changed its name. Although, I can not help to mention, that all media write Slovakia, despite their embassy name also is Embassy of the Slovak Republic in Washington. :-) Danish Expert (talk) 18:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

We're not here to promote anything, we're here to produce an encyclopedia. And that encyclopedia should reflect the world, and the way reliable sources present the subjects that make up the world, it is not its job to attempt to influence anything. See WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 18:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Per that guideline you linked, the embassy probably wont change its name either. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Without promoting anything, I then just have to note, that ECB since 2020 and the European Commission since 2020 both have started to use "Czechia" instead of "Czech Republic", so we have more and more sources starting to use "Czechia" as times go by. Danish Expert (talk) 20:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

We would expect them to, they are official sources linked to the EU. CMD (talk) 01:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

You still seem to be missing the point. That guideline is for CZECHS to follow when writing about their country. It has no bearing on how the outside world writes. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

If I want to book a vacation in Central Europe, will the travel brochures talk about Czechia or the Czech Republic? If the news mentions a new NATO base or missile installation, will it be described as being in Czechia or the Czech Republic? If I am watching hockey, will the team be called Czechia or the Czech Republic? These are the sorts of things that show actual usage, not government bureaucratese. So far, it seems that only the last of my three examples has switched. And even there, other sports have not made the changeover. User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Khajidha Well... [1] still has "Czech Republic" in the URL, but it has "Czechia" in the headline. So watch this space. Doric Loon (talk) 14:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Khajidha: The country's state tourism agency, actually right now have websites up in 2 versions! They want to maximize their tourism promotion - reaching as many as possible. Hence, they operate both www.czechtourism.cz (Promoting Czech Republic for those who learned the old English name of the country in 1993-2016), and www.visitczechia.com (Promoting Czechia for those who learned the new English name of the country in 2016-2024). Please note, that the international .com version of the tourism website (most likely having the highest traffic) promotes "Czechia", while the .cz domain (most likely with less traffic) has the job of promoting "Czech Republic". Danish Expert (talk) 17:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

That's a strange analysis. As you can see, even www.czechtourism.cz has the heading TRAVEL PROFESSIONALS FROM CZECHIA. You keep imagining everything in black and white and expect that a page either has to have only one version of the title or only the second version of the title and that it means something. Also, be aware that czechtourism is an "agency", while visitczechia is an "advertising campaign", so... Strange analysis. Chrz (talk) 17:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

As a general reply to this debate, I can btw today also recommend a read - and potential add of additional sourced content - to this relevant Wikipedia article: Name of the Czech Republic#Adoption of Czechia. The article keeps track and give a summarized update of how widely Czechia is currently used. Danish Expert (talk) 18:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Most of the people who contribute here have been following this issue for a very long time (and know your link), from the times when the name was ridiculed for not even existing, to the present day, when they had to admit that Czechia officially exists and is used by many sources, but they are waiting for "majority usage", which in translation means "when my favorite newspapers will use it". Chrz (talk) 19:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Chrz: Here is a quoted repeat of my first reply in this debate (my post above from 17:19, 26 March):

"According to WP:COMMONNAME and WP:OFFICIALNAMES we have to wait for the majority of reliable secondary sources (in English language) to use Czechia instead of Czech Republic. I support the use of Czechia as soon as possible (with a new check every 6/12 month).

• Czechia became an official name for the English language along with the original Czech Republic in April 2016.
• The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs also just published this guideline in January 2024, in order to instruct which form of the country's name ("Czechia" or "the Czech Republic") is preferred for international use - and in what contexts. The guideline instructs that the country name Czechia should be preferably used [by secondary sources] instead of Czech Republic in all places of published international text in English language - except for "treaty texts" where the long version name "The Czech Republic" is still preferred.

I respect and accept Wikipedia has to wait for the majority of all reliable secondary sources to be aware of and having adopted the new Czechia name, according to the guidelines of the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs. My reply and proposal in this specific debate, was just to highlight that its relevant to have a new check made every 6 month or 12 month. I would give such a proposal my full support. Because we apparently have a rapidly growing number of reliable secondary sources that recently have started using the "Czechia" name as the preferred name over "Czech Republic". Danish Expert (talk) 20:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

In terms of the number of sources, it may have already exceeded the majority, but not in terms of the importance of those sources. (Because newspapers are considered to be the language of common use, while organizations are biased because they cowardly subvert the will of the state.) It probably doesn't make sense to repeat the discussion every six months, as long as the opinion prevails that it can't be changed without newspapers on board. Chrz (talk) 21:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

And if you want to start a new round of discussion about the move, I would wait at least until the Olympics. Maybe it won't be so overwhelmingly in favor of the name Czechia there (and it also depends on how well they do) and journalists will again be rewriting the results "from English to another English", but it makes more sense than now, in a time of relative calm. Chrz (talk) 21:58, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Sub-debate

As a matter of context, I knew nothing about this "Czech Republic" vs "Czechia" battle before March 25, where my proposed edit change of "Czech republic" to "Czechia" in the text body (not article name) of the Enlargement of the eurozone article was reverted by Brainiac242. I made the edit change from "Czech Republic" to "Czechia" in the article text, because many (if not most) of the newest secondary sources had published content about "Czechia and the euro" and not "Czech Republic and the euro". I even only made this edit attempt 1 time, after also having conducted a rapid google search to look into this issue, which introduced me to the Czechia guidelines published by the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs. So I was in good faith, when I did my edit on March 25.

• My own personal agenda is not about the use of Czechia in article titles (or the title of this Czech Republic article). I only have the interest to investigate/check, when exactly the Wikipedia policy can allow me to use "Czechia" in the article text of the article Enlargement of the eurozone.
• According to Brainiac242, there is no difference between article text and article titles, as he argued very briefly in the reverted edit reasoning, that "Czech Republic" shall be preferably used rather than "Czechia" throughout all "article titles" and all "article text" at any place at Wikipedia, for as long as the main topic Wikipedia article Czech Republic has not changed its name to Czechia.

Is Brainiac242 correct? Do I have to wait the long time for the main Czech Republic article to change its name to Czechia, before I start to use Czechia instead of Czech Republic in the Enlargement of the eurozone article? Or do I only have to proof existence of a majority of reliable secondary sources within the specific topic "enlargement of the eurozone" that have used "Czechia" instead of "Czech Republic", within the most recent timeframe (i.e. 2020-2024), before being allowed to us Czechia in the article text of the Enlargement of the eurozone article? Danish Expert (talk) 20:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

MOS:GEO is very clear. A place should generally be referred to consistently by the same name as in the title of its article. In this case this means Czech Republic is the appropriate name. Kahastok talk 21:04, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Take a look at Czech Republic men's national ice hockey team. Even though the team competes under the name Czechia, wikipedians simply cannot stand for the hockey team to be named differently than the state (in the title of the article and not even in the infobox) and in an effort of total unification, they forcibly unify the terminology across Wikipedia even where it contradicts the sources. Because they are allegedly dictated to by the aforementioned recommendation. But to be completely fair, it is graciously allowed in some places, although it is possible that it is just an oversight of the unifiers. Chrz (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I’d just like to point out that Danish Expert did NOT, in fact, simply “use "Czechia" in the article text of the article Enlargement of the eurozone”. They replaced every single mention of “the Czech Republic” with “Czechia” in Czech Republic and the euro, Template:Euro accession map, Template:Exchange-rate regime for EU members, Template:Non-euro currencies of the European Union, and yes Enlargement of the eurozone. Even moving “Czech Republic and the euro” to “Czechia and the euro”. Claiming every time that “The new name "Czechia" replaced the old name "Czech Republic" as the most officially preferred name to be used for the country in April 2016; and as per the published guidelines issued by the Czech government: https://mzv.gov.cz/jnp/en/czechia.html , we shall all start to get used and use the country name Czechia instead of Czech Republic in all places of published international text except of "treaty texts"; just like we now always write "France" instead of the "French Republic"”. Good faith or not, this wasn’t an isolated and reasonable change, it was a full-on attempt to change the way the country is referred to in Wikipedia.

I also did not argue “that "Czech Republic" shall be preferably used rather than "Czechia" throughout all "article titles" and all "article text" at any place at Wikipedia, for as long as the main topic Wikipedia article Czech Republic has not changed its name to Czechia”, or that “there is no difference between article text and article titles”. I simply reverted their edits saying “See WP:COMMONNAME, WP:OFFICIALNAMES. The name change has been proposed plenty of times at Talk:Czech Republic, and has always been rejected”. Brainiac242 (talk) 01:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware that this assessment does not allow for changing the text of articles. These arguments are used for moving the primary article, or as arguments for specific contexts. Centralized discussions are the best place to address these issues, and where the use of synonyms for certain historical or other contexts can be allowed. MOS:GEO does not imply total unification in all circumstances; context plays a role, if it is so evaluated in the discussion. Chrz (talk) 10:20, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I honestly don't understand this whole problem. Why don't we move Czech Republic to Czechia? What I understood is that Wikipedia wants a proof, that it is used sufficiently. What other proof do we need? The most important official and global platforms already use it, what's the problem? Having read all the comments, discussions and so on, I feel like many people fail to realize that we if don't change it right now, it will take just more and more time to finally observe the usage. What is there to discuss? Malinskt (talk) 22:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Because doing so would require a consensus. Previous discussions, such as this one, have failed to do so. CanonNi (talk) 23:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

The problem is the users who are actively trying to undermine efforts to rename the page, saying that Czech Republic is still used in English more than Czechia. However, the use of the long (political) name is largely due to the fact that the country name is presented that way on Wikipedia, which is the main source for a lot of people. --Unloose ^(talk) 11:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Alternate hypothesis: WP:s use doesn't matter that much, there are other sources of English text. However, if you are correct, the title will never change. "efforts to rename the page" can also be seen as problematic, since they eat up time and energy. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

It that case, in order not to "eat up time and energy" it should be changed right away. Those who support the change to Czechia have plenty of evidence, such as the websites of EU, NATO, UN, CIA and so on. What is more important than that? Those who are against the change do not have those contra-evidence, merely opinions. Also, I need to highlight the fact, that supporters of the change need proofs, but supporters of the Czech Republic do not? That doesn't make sense. Also, yes, there are still some people who refer to the country as the Czech Republic, but that's mostly because any article mentioning the country uses the name Czech Republic and it is not permited to use Czechia. This is very much Kafkaesque. Malinskt (talk) 12:05, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

"What is more important than that?" Actual, day-to-day usage in English. Not bureaucratese. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

How do you measure that? People use what they see, currently they see Czechia on Google, Apple maps. Malinskt (talk) 10:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

And the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the one who wants to change things. This is not some strange Wikipedia-only trick to control reality. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:25, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Honestly, at this point I don't think it is "who wants a change" but more like "who doesn't want a change". As said above, the change has already happened. Wikipedia therefore should be updated. Malinskt (talk) 10:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that's one of strangest premises I've ever read on Wikipedia. Do you think every time people want to refer to a country, they check Wikipedia to verify what it's called today? Or that they say to each other "Ooh, I don't know if I should call it "Czechia". I'm scared of what might happen to me if I use it before Wikipedia has retitled its article." It's a miracle people knew what to call countries before Wikipedia existed, isn't it? That we managed the transition from Ceylon to Sri Lanka and Constantinople to Istanbul? Largoplazo (talk) 12:06, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I am fairly concerned that it goes like this: 1) They see e.g. sport event where Czechia is used, they call it Czechia, 2) they search for something where Czechia is mentioned, but it is Czech Republic, 3) they get unsure and use Czech Republic, because that's what they saw on Wiki and "perhaps Czechia is just a nickname". 4) Because of that they might use it on social media. 5) Other person sees Czech Republic... Perhaps it doesn't have such an influence but it slows the proces down. Don't forget, they don't have to search the country, but just some article that mentions it, and it's ridiculous when it's about pre-1993 history and the Czech Republic stands there like if it travelled through time. Malinskt (talk) 12:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't Czechia before 1993 either, so your "ridiculous ... travelled through time" works against you as well. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:04, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it does. Why do we say that Chopin was from Poland? Why do we say that Bach was from Germany? Why do we say that DaVinci was from Italy? None of those existed and yet we use those names. The same goes for Czechia. It is definitely more accurate to say Czechia in historical context than "The Czech Republic" which refers to a country founded in 1993 only. Yes, you can say "... from *place*, now part of the Czech Republic..." but why? It takes more space, it interrupts the flow and so on. Malinskt (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

The point is, that adopting the name Czechia for the current state doesn't automatically mean that that word becomes commonly used for past iterations of the Czech state. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Also, checking the articles of those gentlemen, we DON'T say that Bach was from Germany or that DaVinci was from Italy. They are listed as being born in the duchy of Saxe-Eisenach and the Republic of Florence, respectively. Chopin is, admittedly, anachronistically listed in the infobox as being born in Poland instead of the correct Duchy of Warsaw, though the facts are spelled out in the article. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Are we talking about everyday speech or wikipedia only? I was referring to everyday speech. On top of that, wikipedia says „Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci (15 April 1452 – 2 May 1519) was an Italian polymath of the High Renaissance", it says ITALIAN despite Italy not existing at that time. Having a look on the Florentine Republic, we see that „...early modern state that was centered on the Italian city of Florence in Tuscany, Italy." and it doesn't say „nowadays part of Italy". That being said, in this context where „now part of the Czech Republic" or anything of that kind, we could simply use "Czechia" Malinskt (talk) 07:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Italian in that context is a cultural term, not a geographic one. And I do agree that the Florentine Republic article is wrongly phrased.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Also, "it slows the proces down" assumes that the process actually needs to proceed. I don't understand what the problem is. English and Czech ARE different languages. They ARE allowed to call things different words. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

It's been proceeding 8 years, since then numerous important platforms started using it. I really haven't found any reason why not to move it to Czechia. You're arguments aren't anti-Czechia either. I will just wait till the olympics as many of you suggested. Malinskt (talk) 08:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Finally, if they read past the title, they will see that Wikipedia says "also known as Czechia", so how would the page name here stop them from using Czechia? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that is true, but other articles do not say "...in a town in the Czech Republic (also known as Czechia)". But yeah, if it isn't moved after the olympics, I don't see a reason why not add it there. Malinskt (talk) 07:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Because saying that for every occasion of mentioning the country would be redundant. For example, we don't say ...in a town in Guangdong (also known as Canton). CanonNi (talk) 08:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

That's perhaps a plausible scenario up to a point, but I'm skeptical about step 3. I'm imagining they come here, see "Czechia" mentioned, say to themselves, "Oh, the country has a shorter name, like United States instead of United States of America", and then they return to the context in which they encountered "Czechia" and, from their exposure to that, "Czechia" becomes normalized for them. Except that I imagine that the viewers who sees "Czechia" and need to run and look it up aren't, by and large, the same people who are writing about Czechia in current reliable sources. The New York Times and The Independent aren't following Wikipedia on this. Largoplazo (talk) 16:37, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Remember that, while individual editors might have their preferences, Wikipedia as an institution is neutral on what the country should be called.

I don't actually believe that Wikipedia is as influential as the argument supposes. But even if it is, it doesn't matter. Unless you are suggesting we campaign for a name change - which we're not allowed to do - then the question of how much influence Wikipedia has on the name used by the rest of the world is entirely irrelevant to this discussion. Kahastok talk 17:34, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

If we want to do our best to minimize the impact of Wikipedia on the surrounding world, we could at least modify the first sentence from a vague "also known as" to a more decisive "short form", or as in the UEA case "or simply". Chrz (talk) 11:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

You are right. This is a good idea.

"The Czech Republic, also known as Czechia, is a landlocked country in Central Europe." --> "The Czech Republic, or Czechia (official short form), is a landlocked country in Central Europe. "

This would be probably the best solution. Malinskt (talk) 11:29, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

The article title and the first mention of the name clearly indicate which name is the so-called "common" one. The carefully chosen words for the alternative form at least do not downgrade its importance - from "historically" through "rarely" and "also known as" to "or", which I would see as the last step before renaming.

The Czech Republic, or Czechia, keep it simple :) Chrz (talk) 11:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

The problem is currently, no other country article uses the same "xxx", or yyy" format. Most use the "yyy, officially the xxx" format. Therefore, I suggest keeping the lead in its current state until the article has been moved. CanonNi (talk) 12:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

(IMHO) no other country uses the same "xxx", also known as "yyy" format. One original format is considered acceptable, while the other is seen as problematic. Chrz (talk) 13:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

That's not true. For example, the article of East Timor states, "East Timor, also known as Timor-Leste, officially the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, is a country in Southeast Asia." CanonNi (talk) 13:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Either way, WP:OTHERCONTENT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the reminder. CanonNi (talk) 13:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Consistency, unified format.

Ehm, not the same, it would be: Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, also known as East Timor, is... Chrz (talk) 15:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

You are getting confused as to what the formats here and at East Timor are. It isn't longform then shortform or vice versa. It is most commonly used then other. In East Timor's case that puts the short form first. Here, it produces the reverse. But they are still the same pattern. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, East Timor has three names, one of them introduced as "official", Czech Republic has only two and none of them is identified as official. That's why I don't think it is the same pattern at all, the Czech Republic has a completelly unique word order, name order and number of names, that's why it might deserve its own "or", "or unofficially", or whatever between those two names on different level of "officiality" (formality). (Maybe that UAE case is the closest, although "Emirates" and "Czechia" are not from the same pond, used by different type of sources.) Chrz (talk) 17:03, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

That's because other countries have the name of the article as their short name and then it is added that the full name is for example Slovak Republic.

Name: Slovakia. First sentence: Slovakia (/sloʊˈvækiə, -ˈvɑːk-/ ^ⓘ;Slovak: Slovensko [ˈslɔʋenskɔ] ^ⓘ), officially the Slovak Republic (Slovak: Slovenská republika [ˈslɔʋenskaː ˈrepublika] ^ⓘ), is a landlocked country in Central Europe.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean with "unofficial". The official name of Czechia is Czechia (short form) and the Czech Republic (long form). That's why it should be "or", not "also known as".

The "officially" is a big bug in Wikipedia because both name, political and geographical, are official. Malinskt (talk) 17:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

If Wikipedia uses "officially" for "long formal official". I used "unofficial" for the other cases (official short or some unregistered but used nickname), but I would rather not use that word in the text. Chrz (talk) 17:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

"Officially" should probably be "formally", because what is meant is the form used in treaties and such. "Kingdom of Whereveria", "Republic of Somewheristan", etc. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 20:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

In fact, all this discussion about longforms and shortforms is misguided. The general pattern is common name followed by full formal name. There is no provision for the "short official name" because it would almost always be the same as the common name. That's why it took so log to get Czechia added here. It doesn't fit in either slot. It was only when usage increased that it was put in the lead-- User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 20:15, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

The difference is simple: Slovakia has been the normal name for that country in English since it gained independence. Things are a bit different here as Czech Republic became the normal name for this country upon independence and while there is a push to make the shorter name more common, it has been only partially successful. Funnyhat (talk) 22:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

That's only partially true. Czechia was in fact used in 1990's too, but then, I don't know what happened, but they stopped using it or what and also did not add to to te UN register in 1993. Malinskt (talk) 10:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, and that's the problem. The current commonly used name is Czech Republic, not Czechia. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 10:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Also not true. Let me repeat myself for the hundredth time. If anything, both are used just as much. But Czechia is on Google maps, Apple maps, many other platforms use it (AirBnB, Bolt, Youtube, WhatsApp) so I would not be that confident about it. Malinskt (talk) 10:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

That is something I would support. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Voting?

• Czechia, officially the Czech Republic,
• Czech Republic, or Czechia,
• Czech Republic, also Czechia,
• Czech Republic, or simply Czechia,
• Czech Republic, informally Czechia,
• Czech Republic, or informally Czechia,
• Czech Republic, short form Czechia,
• keep Czech Republic, also known as Czechia,
• something else

I think I ordered it by how much weight the alternative name carries (where "alternative name" refers to the name not chosen as the article title) and IMHO it deserves to be moved higher. Chrz (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know if it's general English, my dialect, or just me, but "Czech Republic, also Czechia" just seems incomplete/incorrect to me. It looks like some sort of typo for "Czech Republic, also known as Czechia". -- User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 01:26, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

as well as Chrz (talk) 08:13, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

"The Czech Republic, as well as Czechia, ..." feels like the CZ, and Czechia. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 08:15, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Conjunction (grammar) - I am searching for non-exclusive meaning - "both are OK and you can use both in the same text". For example using both spelling "Vietnam" and "Viet Nam" in the same text would not be good. If switching between East Timor and Timor-Leste in the same text is cool, IDK. Chrz (talk) 09:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

In that case "The Czech Republic, or Czechia for short, is a ..." might be a good idea. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 09:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep in mind of WP:NOVOTE. CanonNi (talk) 01:50, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

I vote for "Czech Republic, or Czechia..." and then, once it's moved, "Czechia, full name the Czech Republic..." Malinskt (talk) 20:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

The current opening ("The Czech Republic, also known as Czechia) works best. I don't see how any of the others improves on it. It avoids any judgment about formality and just states the two names. Funnyhat (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Let's make it consistent with other articles about countries on Wikipedia. The best alternative in that case is: Czechia, officially the Czech Republic. -- Unloose ^(talk) 10:29, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

That breaks MOS:LEADSENTENCE, which says If possible, the page title should be the subject of the first sentence.

I see no issue with the current form, and I don't see any improvement in the options above. Kahastok talk 10:38, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

And we are getting back to the problem. Czechia should be the title of the page. Malinskt (talk) 10:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

When it's allowed. Open an RM on this page's title. GoodDay (talk) 17:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Anyone who wants can open a WP:RM#CM now, if that's what you meant. IMO it wouldn't be a good idea, but that's me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Correct, see my opening response to this greater discussion. Basically, "We just did this, please give us a break." Largoplazo (talk) 16:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Hm, almost two months ago. Time flies. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

BTW Following up on your message in the archived discussion:

Consider writing the EU next, there are 4 "the Czechia" at [2]. 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I did, "the Czechia" is gone. When you wrote that, it was supposed to be an argument against Czechia, but now that they're using the name without 'the', it suddenly becomes an uninteresting source, right? Chrz (talk) 11:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Expanding the infobox with additional data

Can I have another opinion regarding the current expansion of the infobox with additional historical data? In my opinion, for the need of the infobox, this item should be brief and really only contain Establishment data, not turning point battles etc. FromCzech (talk) 05:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

I'd tend to agree, although it seems the infoboxes of other countries are also getting bloated with those additional historical events. In any case, I have reverted the changes back to the status quo until there is a consensus of what to include there. Vpab15 (talk) 10:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @FeldmarschallGneisenau, who introduced the changes. Vpab15 (talk) 10:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

White Mountain wasn't just "a turning point battle." It pretty much obliterated the very existence of the Czech language until the 19th century, when it was artificially revived by German-speaking people with German names and/or surnames. Everything else I explained briefly in the edit reason. Establishment of Habsburg rule over Bohemia in 1526 is an Establishment event. By the way, dis-establishment events are marked in other articles also, such as the Partitions of Poland. FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 21:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

The Czech language was never "obliterated" and/or "artificially revived". Not after the White Mountain, not ever. Where is this nonsense coming from? Czech-speakers have always formed at least 2/3 majority of the population of Czechia until the end of WWII. Habsburgs were just another dynasty on the Czech throne. Qertis (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Czech-speakers were driven out into the countryside, and then German settlement began in the countryside also. Czech was dying out by the 19th century and was revived. Dictionaries were published and words entirely made up to counter German dominance. Hence why Czech has uniquely many archaic words, phrases or, e.g. chemical or engineering terms which are completely Slavic, because there was an effort to retrace, recreate (and in some cases completely create anew) a pure Czech Slavic language. Charles University opened a Czech section only in the 2nd half of the 19th century FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 23:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Noone was driven into the countryside; there was a significant emigration, but it was both Czech- and German-speaking. Czech was not dying out and/or revived. You are severely overestimating the impact purists had on the language. 17th or 18th century Czech is almost indistinguishable from the modern language. Sure, there are new words and words no longer used, but that applies to any language. There are several hundred words intentionally borrowed from other Slavic languages or recreated from older Czech words but they form only a tiny fraction of the Czech vocabulary. And mind you, this was not a Czech-specific thing. Replacing foreign words with domestic (or domestic-sounding) ones was very popular at that time throughout Europe. Qertis (talk) 07:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

It's just the fact that the purists had German names and German was their first language... FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 08:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

The fewer the events, the clearer the purpose. The infobox was really designed to have one date, independence (date of sovereignty), although that clearly breaks down in some situations. CMD (talk) 01:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

According to who? FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 01:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, When considering any aspect of infobox design, keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article. (That is, an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored, with exceptions noted below.) The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. Of necessity, some infoboxes contain more than just a few fields; however, wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 01:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

You are free to check out how it looks in the infoboxes of the United States, France, Russia, Poland, Romania and basically any other. That was the intention behind my edits, to bring the Czechia page closer to what every other country page looks like. Currently it looks like the infobox is deliberately omitting key events from Czech history.FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 02:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

The articles you linked all contain infoboxes with establishment history and changes in the country's rule. None of them contain battles, even if it was a "turning point". '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 02:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Serbia does, just phrased differently. Just look around. Anyhow, I hope there's no debate about including the establishment of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia and the subsequent establishment of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic in the infobox. I don't understand why the infobox is so poor right now.FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 02:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't see any battles in Serbia's infobox. However, the inclusion of the Protectorate can be discussed with other editors. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 02:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Fine. And the inclusion of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic too. I concede your point on not featuring the Battle in the infobox. However I still think the Hussite Wars and Habsburg suzerainty should be included.FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 02:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Info box not the place for military accomplishments Moxy🍁 03:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

It's not a military accomplishment. The Hussite Wars started in reaction to increasing German-language domination over Czech lands and resulted in an outburst and flourishing of Czech national culture, albeit as a sort of swan song when Czech culture began being curbed after the fall of the Hussite period, establishment of Habsburg suzerainty and then after the Battle of the White Mountain when Czech culture started to be actively suppressed and the lands re-Catholicized and Germanized. Similar events interwoven with military engagements are described in the infoboxes of Serbia etc.FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 03:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Because of this the country was formed? Moxy🍁 03:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

There is no such very strict criteria, it's just a list of key events in the history of a country. See: infoboxes on any other country pages.FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 03:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

The fields in question are to support the |sovereignty_type = field, they are not for listing all historical events. CMD (talk) 03:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm far from listing all historical events Czechia was involved in. At the very least however, establishment of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, as well as the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and Habsburg overlordship, should be highlighted.FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 04:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Infobox establishment events - the Protectorate and the CSSR

For there to truly be no consensus against including the states of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia and the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic in the history of established states on Czech soil, there must be good arguments against including these omitted events from the current page's infobox. I think the case for including these is self-evident, so I wonder who can be against and why. If, apparently, it turns out everyone is for it, it means there is consensus and this urgent change will be re-applied swiftly. Please state your case. FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 21:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not seeing how satellite States are related to the formation of the current country? Moxy🍁 22:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

It's not a "sovereign established states" list though. Just what states were established on Czech territory since what date. The Czech Republic is a direct continuator and successor of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, of the Czech portion specifically.FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 23:12, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Exactly, how they are related? What I wrote at the beginning of the first discussion about expanding the infobox applies. Even you did not consider these events important during the first batch of your attempts to expand the infobox. FromCzech (talk) 04:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not Czech. It's not my job to be cognizant of every important fact about this country immediately. But I remembered these 2 important events anyhow.FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 23:12, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Anyone? No arguments? FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 22:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

How is being a puppet of Nazi Germany an important step in developing sovereignty? It seems rather the reverse.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 23:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

It's not a sovereignty list, only establishment list. List of established states on Czech soil. FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 04:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

It is a sovereignty list, it's specifically a list of events that established sovereignty. CMD (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Are we really just spouting our opinions as facts set in stone now? Let's be serious. A cursory look over other country pages show that within the Czech page, some major whitewashing of history is brewing. The Czechs got divvied up by Western Europe in 1938. And became the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia in 1939 and supplied Adolf's army until 1945 and was the last stand of the German army. Then the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic was established. The current Czech Republic is a direct legal successor of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, specifically its Czech part. Direct continuation, same state really, only with a name change. FeldmarschallGneisenau (talk) 14:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)