Talk:Cherykaw District

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Cherykaw Raion. 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/20100918181854/http://belstat.gov.by/homep/ru/perepic/2009/vihod_tables/1.2-7.pdf to http://belstat.gov.by/homep/ru/perepic/2009/vihod_tables/1.2-7.pdf

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) 11:19, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 13 September 2017

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: pages moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:39, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Cherykaw Raion → Cherykaw District – WP:UE, consistency in Category:Districts of Mogilev Region 77.180.131.56 (talk) 17:46, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Is this valid? Russia (with Ukraine and Bielorussia) have/had more than one level of administrative district: oblast and raion, and in former times guberniya. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * And also:
 * Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This really becomes annoying. We have consensus at Talk:Instruction on transliteration of Belarusian geographical names with letters of Latin script, half of the districts were already moved, and an RfC is not needed. I clearly told to the IP that I am going to move all of them, and I am unhappy with their activity all over the place. They are probably Tobias Conradi, a globally banned user.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Anthony Appleyard's reasoning is absurd: there are dozens of countries that have different levels of administrative territorial entities - to use a generic term instead of "administrative district", since one of the classes discussed is named "district" in English - and at the same time have one level named "district". Even more absurd it gets, when looking at the first example given, Russia, because for Russia the entities named "raion" in Russian, are named "district" in English too and this is applied in the English Wikipedia. Same is true for Belarus, "raion/rajon" are named "district" in English. What "oblast" and "guberniya" out of several classes of administrative territorial entities specifically have to do with the "raion"-naming in English remains obscure. Last but not least, Anthony Appleyard made a joke out of the process of uncontroversial technical requests by removing the above requests from the page and adding a summary "done 9", where "done" means request fulfilled, a fact that is known to Anthony Appleyard , . Anthony Appleyard could have looked into the alphabetically first entry in the category that used the form "X District" and would have found that admin User:Ymblanter had moved it and mentioned a "previously found consensus for Belarusian districts". . 78.55.236.46 (talk) 19:26, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This really becomes annoying. We have consensus at Talk:Instruction on transliteration of Belarusian geographical names with letters of Latin script, half of the districts were already moved, and an RfC is not needed. I clearly told to the IP that I am going to move all of them, and I am unhappy with their activity all over the place. They are probably Tobias Conradi, a globally banned user.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Anthony Appleyard's reasoning is absurd: there are dozens of countries that have different levels of administrative territorial entities - to use a generic term instead of "administrative district", since one of the classes discussed is named "district" in English - and at the same time have one level named "district". Even more absurd it gets, when looking at the first example given, Russia, because for Russia the entities named "raion" in Russian, are named "district" in English too and this is applied in the English Wikipedia. Same is true for Belarus, "raion/rajon" are named "district" in English. What "oblast" and "guberniya" out of several classes of administrative territorial entities specifically have to do with the "raion"-naming in English remains obscure. Last but not least, Anthony Appleyard made a joke out of the process of uncontroversial technical requests by removing the above requests from the page and adding a summary "done 9", where "done" means request fulfilled, a fact that is known to Anthony Appleyard , . Anthony Appleyard could have looked into the alphabetically first entry in the category that used the form "X District" and would have found that admin User:Ymblanter had moved it and mentioned a "previously found consensus for Belarusian districts". . 78.55.236.46 (talk) 19:26, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This really becomes annoying. We have consensus at Talk:Instruction on transliteration of Belarusian geographical names with letters of Latin script, half of the districts were already moved, and an RfC is not needed. I clearly told to the IP that I am going to move all of them, and I am unhappy with their activity all over the place. They are probably Tobias Conradi, a globally banned user.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Anthony Appleyard's reasoning is absurd: there are dozens of countries that have different levels of administrative territorial entities - to use a generic term instead of "administrative district", since one of the classes discussed is named "district" in English - and at the same time have one level named "district". Even more absurd it gets, when looking at the first example given, Russia, because for Russia the entities named "raion" in Russian, are named "district" in English too and this is applied in the English Wikipedia. Same is true for Belarus, "raion/rajon" are named "district" in English. What "oblast" and "guberniya" out of several classes of administrative territorial entities specifically have to do with the "raion"-naming in English remains obscure. Last but not least, Anthony Appleyard made a joke out of the process of uncontroversial technical requests by removing the above requests from the page and adding a summary "done 9", where "done" means request fulfilled, a fact that is known to Anthony Appleyard , . Anthony Appleyard could have looked into the alphabetically first entry in the category that used the form "X District" and would have found that admin User:Ymblanter had moved it and mentioned a "previously found consensus for Belarusian districts". . 78.55.236.46 (talk) 19:26, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This really becomes annoying. We have consensus at Talk:Instruction on transliteration of Belarusian geographical names with letters of Latin script, half of the districts were already moved, and an RfC is not needed. I clearly told to the IP that I am going to move all of them, and I am unhappy with their activity all over the place. They are probably Tobias Conradi, a globally banned user.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Anthony Appleyard's reasoning is absurd: there are dozens of countries that have different levels of administrative territorial entities - to use a generic term instead of "administrative district", since one of the classes discussed is named "district" in English - and at the same time have one level named "district". Even more absurd it gets, when looking at the first example given, Russia, because for Russia the entities named "raion" in Russian, are named "district" in English too and this is applied in the English Wikipedia. Same is true for Belarus, "raion/rajon" are named "district" in English. What "oblast" and "guberniya" out of several classes of administrative territorial entities specifically have to do with the "raion"-naming in English remains obscure. Last but not least, Anthony Appleyard made a joke out of the process of uncontroversial technical requests by removing the above requests from the page and adding a summary "done 9", where "done" means request fulfilled, a fact that is known to Anthony Appleyard , . Anthony Appleyard could have looked into the alphabetically first entry in the category that used the form "X District" and would have found that admin User:Ymblanter had moved it and mentioned a "previously found consensus for Belarusian districts". . 78.55.236.46 (talk) 19:26, 14 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry, typo, for "done 9" I should have written "discuss 9". See Special:Contributions/78.55.236.46. Should I make the above moves now? Or should I await more discussion? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Anthony Appleyard - you are the only one to have contested the request under WP:RM/uncontroversial. If you withdraw your objection, they can be moved, also by you. 77.179.236.12 (talk) 01:18, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I have made the moves. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:00, 15 September 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.