Talk:Rahovec

Etymology
@Durraz0 Etymology is the study of word's origin and meaning. The origin and meaning of the word is Serbian, and is supposed be explained first. Later-developed variants goes more in depth later on. That is how an article is supposed to be composed. The title of the article has no purpose in this section of etymology. --Azor (talk). 13:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)


 * It makes more sense to have the current name followed by its root, this is how the other articles on wiki do it, see for example Niš or Berat, there we have the name followed by its original stem from another language. Durraz0 (talk) 13:32, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Durraz0 What gives sense to you is off topic. Etymology is the study of origins, in which the origin is first presented and then preceded to present the later-developed variants. That's how all Etymology section is composed. Both of the cities you mentioned start with the original etymology of the names, so I do not see your point. While the current name of the city is irrelevant to the Etymology section, Orahovac is co-official and can also be considered the city's name. --Azor (talk). 13:38, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, etymology is the study of origins, the origins of Rahovec is from Orahovac. the name of the article is Rahovec, therefor it follows that it is first explained where Rahovec comes from. The way you wrote it now makes it seem like the name of the article itself is Orahovac. Durraz0 (talk) 13:46, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * As I have said, the name of the article has no role in the etymology section. Rahovec is of Serbian origin, just like Orahovac. Despite Orahovac also being the city's name, I decided to change the sentence up, take a look. --Azor (talk). 13:51, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Rahovec is indeed the Albanized version of the Serbian name Orahovac. The name of the article has a role in the etymology section, because that is what we are trying to explain/find the origin of. I really appreciate that you want to reach a consensus here. friendly reminder you accidentally removed the source in this edit . Durraz0 (talk) 14:00, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes my mistake, cheers. --Azor (talk). 14:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)