Talk:Bystrzyca Kłodzka

German name discussion
Gzornenplatz, could you state your sources that would back up your claims that the German wiki is wrong here (apart from the fact that you changed the German version today)? Until your recent change it said that the German name still is Habelschwerdt. Also, please refrain yourself from starting a revert war until a consensus is reached. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 21:28, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * Halibutt, for the same reason explained on Talk:Pila. There is ONE (1) Google hit for "Habelschwerdt Polen". Gzornenplatz 21:34, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * You can't help starting a revert war before the matter is resolved, can you.


 * Habelschwerdt - 2710
 * Bystrzyca Kłodzka - 54
 * Bystrzyca Klodzka - 714


 * So, all in all, the Germans refer to the town as Habelschwerdt in 77,9% of cases and as either "Bystrzyca Klodzka" or "Bystrzyca K&#322;odzka" in 22,08% of cases. The German wiki until your recent edit also referred to the town's German name as Habelschwerdt. So, is there anything that would support your version? Certainly not the German language usage. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 22:15, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * What on Earth is the relevance of a simple Google search on "Habelschwerdt"? 99% of those results refer to the historical city, not the present one. Gzornenplatz 22:17, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)

--[[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 22:49, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) It was you who posted the result of a Google search first. Which means that apparently we both agree that Google can be used to check whether the name is popular or not in some language. In this context we can use Google to check if by the end of 20th century and at the beginning of 21st century the name is used or not. The results I posted proved that it is.
 * 2) Whether they name this town this way for historical, ethical, moral, sentimental or any other reasons is none of our business. The fact is that they do use it as a way to refer to the town in German. If the majority of German webmasters use the name, then it must be a German name.


 * No offense, but... are you dense? There's nothing wrong with Google searches, there's a lot wrong with your Google search, because a search of "Habelschwerdt" is meaningless since no one denies that it was the name of the city when it was part of Germany, and accordingly there are Google results that talk about the historic German city, which of course use the former German name. If you want to see what the present city is referred to, you have to use "Habelschwerdt Polen", which finds exactly ONE result. Gzornenplatz 22:53, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * Do not try to offend me. Personal arguments are not what Wikipedia needs. Read and make sure you understand well the Civility policy. Perhaps you'll be surprised, but one does not have to be dumb not to agree with your views. It's high time you understood that.


 * The method you have chosen is absolutely wrong. Google searching for "Habelschwerdt Polen" will not show pages describing "Habelschwerdt, a city that has been transferred to Polen in 1945" or any other similar descriptive terms. It will not show "Habelschwerdt in Polen" if such a page existed, nor even a link to the German Wikipedia article that lists both names but none of them is succeeded by the word "Polen". As far as I know German language is different from American English in that in German you don't have to put the name of the country right after the name of the city.


 * If you want to check for the current usage it would be better to search for the names and a recent date. The problem is that this search also shows a overwhelming majority of Habelschwerdt links: If the search is for "Habelschwerdt" 2003, "Bystrzyca Klodzka" 2003 and "Bystrzyca K&#322;odzka" 2003 exactly 87% of the links use the German name (I combine both of the Polish names). If the date is changed to 1999 - it's 89%, while for 2002 it's 86%. (links:, , , check others if you don't believe). Do you have any other ideas? [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 01:49, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * Your logic is seriously flawed. Of course "Habelschwerdt Polen" does not find all links that might be relevant, but all the links it does find are relevant, contrary to your searches which find almost exclusively references to the historical city (the addition of a year does not change this, since this can appear on a totally unrelated part of the page). The immediate addition of "Polen", on the other hand, ensures that all results refer to the Polish city. Gzornenplatz 08:54, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * I always knew that Poland is a relatively big country, but I never imagined that it's that big. Thanks, every day I learn something new:

--[[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 03:36, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Paris Polen - 10,600
 * 2) Berlin Polen - 5,650
 * 3) München Polen - 2,080...


 * Another bizarre non-argument. Do you have anything to say here? Gzornenplatz 08:30, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * Calling it a "non-argument" is easier than answering it, indeed. The above example proves that your method of adding "Polen" to the name in question is wrong, since it proves your argument that your method is good wrong. You said that all the links it does find are relevant. No, they're not, apparently. All it does is to limit the number of links to those who have two words accidentially put one by another, nothing more, nothing less. You can say I'm a moron, you can say that my arguments are absurd, but it's no wonder that you don't try to argue with facts. Good for you. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 11:07, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * Your example does not disprove my argument in the slightest. How do 5,650 hits for "Berlin Polen" prove that the hits for "Pila Polen" are not relevant? Pila is in Poland, Berlin isn't. Most web sites do not put words "accidentally one by another". Most hits for "Berlin Polen" refer to a route from Berlin to Poland. Obviously that would be absurd for "Pila Polen". And if you actually look through the results for "Pila Polen" you'll see that they all (i.e. at least 95%) refer to the city in Poland. Want to go through them individually? It's sad to see you groping at straws now to defend the indefensible. Gzornenplatz 12:09, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * So now the German name of Bystrzyca is Pila, right? Anyway, if in your opinion all searches for "Pila Polen" show links to pages that speak of the town of Pi&#322;a after 1945, then obviously this should be true for all other towns and cities as well. Links to "Berlin Polen" should link to the Berlin in Poland and the links to "Paris Polen" should refer mostly to the times when Paris was in Poland. Right? Beeep, sorry. Wrong answer.


 * Also, if you suggest the search for "Pila Polen", then why doesn't it link to the German wikipedia article? A hint: because such a configuration is not used in German, perhaps? I'm not defending the indefensible, so far you haven't proved that the German names have changed. The German language names are still the same, check any article apart from those edited by yourself. Any, I mean. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 13:26, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * What goes for Pila goes for Bystrzyca and the many other cases. I don't want to repeat the same arguments on dozens of talk pages. There's no city named Berlin or Paris in Poland, so your argument makes no sense. I never said that any Google result for "x Polen" means that "x" must be a city in Poland. Again you prove to be a bit logically-challenged. I only say that if you take any actual Polish city x, then almost all hits for "x Polen" will indeed refer to that city. And I note you refuse the challenge to look at the actual Google results for "Pila Polen" and see how many of them don't clearly refer to the city. Gzornenplatz 13:51, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid that this discussion makes no sense. Apparently I won't convince you and you won't convince me. I'm also afraid that immediately after this article is unblocked you'll pop in and start a revert war again. That's not my favourite kind of game and I'd rather avoid it. Perhaps we could find some other work-around? Or perhaps you could simply convince some more people than yourself (and, akhem-akhem, Wik). I'm not a German speaker so I have to rely on what others tell me. So far the German wikipedians tell me that you are wrong, but perhaps it's them who is wrong and you are right, I don't know. What do you suggest? [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 13:31, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * What does not make sense is your arguments. Consequently I will indeed continue to revert the articles as necessary. I suggest you rely on demonstrable facts as opposed to some individual's say-so. "The German wikipedians" (which ones? how many?) are no authority, and they actually prove me right to the extent that they have their articles at Pi& and Bystrzyca K& - I did not move those articles there, I merely changed the internal inconsistency. Gzornenplatz 13:51, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

Protection
I protected the page due to revert war and request on WP:RFPP. Thanks. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 00:49, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, let's hope now we can find some common sense in this mess. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]]