Talk:Bohemian Switzerland

lead
I changed the lead section so that Bohemian Switzerland appears as translation of České Švýcarsko, not just as translation of Böhmische Schweiz. AFAIK český can refer to both Czech (i.e. Bohemia + Moravia) and Bohemia alone. If I did something wrong, please correct it. Yaan (talk) 14:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Bohemian Switzerland. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091109165704/http://www.jirisebek.com:80/photos/bohemian-switzerland/ to http://www.jirisebek.com/photos/bohemian-switzerland/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:06, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

German names
I see the German names in brackets were removed some time back as "redundant for English Wikipedia". However, the region was populated by Germans for about 8 centuries before they were expelled just 70 odd years ago. As a result the German names are important historically and, in some cases, are the more common name in English e.g. Marienfels. I'm not proposing they are main names, but they should be included in brackets so that editors can identify them when studying 800 years of history up to and including the Second World War. This is common Wiki and encyclopaedic practice. Bermicourt (talk) 16:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Common wiki practice is to use modern names. Where relevant, obsolete names are given in brackets the (here Böhmische Schweiz; Marienfels is given on the Mariina skála page, etc.) Mentioning such old names at every opportunity, because 78 years ago there was a mostly German-speaking majority (but Czech names, due to belonging to Bohemia, are also historically embedded for centuries), could be considered rather a manifestation of nationalism. They have their justification on the dewiki, but are redundant here. If you don't agree, I'd be happy to hear a third opinion. FromCzech (talk) 18:17, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * "Common wiki practice is to use modern names." Yes and the article does that - that's not the question. I'm referring to historical names that will be found in all sources prior to 1945 and thus are relevant. And I'm not suggesting they are used "at every opportunity" but only the first time the name occurs. This is not nationalism - I'm not German - it is sensible inclusion of historical information. English Wikipedia often includes names in other languages, especially where there is a link, which clearly there is in this case. It's encyclopaedic. Here's what the Wiki guideline says: "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or that is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted." So we don't need a third opinion - we have the standard convention. Bermicourt (talk) 19:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You just basically backed up what I'm saying. The entire text and title of this bullet is: "2. The lead: The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parentheses..." Alternative (historical) names belong in parentheses to the lead, not to each occasion in the text. FromCzech (talk) 05:23, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * But the guidance is clear and the logic for it is clear. So, by extension, it makes absolute sense to do the same in the text. Otherwise you have clarity in the lede and potential confusion everywhere else. Why are you having such a problem with this? Bermicourt (talk) 09:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)