Talk:Byelorussian Military District

Naming conventions (geographic names)
People should familiarise themselves with the Naming conventions (geographic names). Based on this policy, the geographic names need to use naming that reflects English usage, and use during historical period. One can not have a Belarussian Military District and a 1st Belorussian Front. One or the other is misspelled, and given the Soviet Army official language was Russian, the spellign is with an o.--mrg3105 (comms) If you're not taking any flak, you're not over the target. 01:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Be my guest.. move the page. But please remember to change all the things that point at it. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps a redirect can be created with the name 'Belarussian Military District' that points to a renamed 'Belorussian Military District' article. --W. B. Wilson (talk) 11:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps not. Why create a redirect for something that never existed? The Independent state of Belarus is divided into different military entities, and the Belorussian Military District ceased to exist at the same time the Soviet Army and the Soviet Union did. I'm not trying to be a bastard, but there is just no reason to create redirects to non-entities. Its not even an alternative spelling.--mrg3105 (comms) If you're not taking any flak, you're not over the target. 11:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The reason to create it would be to save the trouble of having to immediately edit all the links to the misspelled name that fail because of the name change. While it would be more correct to edit all the items that point to the misspelled name, the effort may be of a scale that it would take a while to correct.  Be careful about my suggestion, though -- I don't know how to spell the names of Polish cities and I harbor eccentric ideas about SS propaganda being present in Wikipedia! Heh. --W. B. Wilson (talk) 12:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Let us remember that not only was Rome not built in one day, but it was not rebuilt in one day either on the two occasions it was burnt to a cinder. I prefer to go with the longer, but appropriate course of action, and gradually correct all the redlinks that would result from the correction in the main article then create a redirect that may be a short-cut, but one that is unnecessary. I do believe that every shortcut taken makes the ultimate journey a lengthier one. --mrg3105 (comms) If you're not taking any flak, you're not over the target. 12:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)