Talk:Warsaw/Vote talk

Voting
You've neglected to provide a Russian variant (Varshava). The Russians accumulated much more occupation time in Warsaw than the Germans ever did. Please add the Russian variant, to provide some color of rationality to this undertaking. logologist 10:50, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * A Latin variant would also be helpful, for the medieval period. logologist 10:53, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The Russian name was never used by English-speaking people.--Schlesier 15:21, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * just out of curiosity - when was "Warschau" used by English-speaking people??? - Blueshade 18:28, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * And what about the 1915-1918 period? It should be treated separately. Halibutt 11:26, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

This is a stupid proposition to vote on. The place is known as Warsaw in ENGLISH. If someone wishes to include the names used by Germans, Russians, Poles or Romans let them but that does not change the name of the city in English. If I write an article which includes the city, I will use the name Warsaw no matter what the locals were calling it at the time. If it is relevant and would help the article, I will include the name used by the locals at the time (or the Roman name or whatever). To argue that just because the city had a local name of something else at some time that anyone who call it Warsaw would be committing vandalism is stupid. Philip Baird Shearer 11:34, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This is incredibly stupid. In English, the place is Warsaw. There is no need for any of this. john k 13:21, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

For once I have to agree with Philip Baird Shearer; there is no question in this case about what the name is in English. This whole thing is stupid and completely unnecessary. / Uppland 13:27, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Please dont forget that Warschau was one of eastern German cities for a long time... --Schlesier 15:21, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Huh? Warsaw was Prussian for 11 years (1795-1806).  Otherwise, it has never properly been ruled by a German state. This is absurd all around. john k 16:13, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Warschau was populated mostly by Germans. The city was founded by German colonists, with DAS DEUTSCHES STADTRECHT (German cityr rights), in the 13-century. If you are interested of the REAL (without polish revisionism) history of that city please read: "Das deutsche Masovien", Stuttgart, Eher-Verlag by Günter Bauer--Schlesier 16:22, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * [Some nasty personal attacks by me deleted - after due deliberation, I think better of them. john k 23:00, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)]


 * no comments..--Schlesier 17:39, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Let me add that this user is pretty clearly a troll and a sockpuppet (of whom, I am not sure). john k 13:31, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Schlesier: no offense but your comment about Warsaw being populated by Germans in the past is irrelevant because it does not effect how the city is named in English. Munich is mostly populated by Germans now but nobody argues that it should be called anything but Munich in English. The only reason why we had the Danzig/Gdansk vote was because that city has been referred to under both names in English at various points in history. Rje 14:53, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)


 * The orginal name of the city (Warschau) is still used in the English language. See: http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=Warschau+City&meta= (google)--Schlesier 17:31, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * An old map of Warschau http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Karte_Warschau_MKL1888.png --Schlesier 17:34, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I have an equally reasonable proposal :) Let's rename all articles concerning German Cities, according to this map: ... great idea! what do you think? - Blueshade 18:34, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How about voting for Frankreich/France ? Lysy 15:36, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Who is User:Schlesier and why is he/she trying to stir up this tempest? Sounds like sour grapes over the Danzig/Gdansk situation. It is worth nothing that, other than edits to his User and Talk pages, the Vote page is the first page this User created or edited. RickK 23:15, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

Obviously a sockpuppet. john k 23:26, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't know if he's a sockpuppet; I'd say he's a German of Silesian origin (Schlesier is German for Silesian) who's disgruntled that ethnic Germans were forcibly evicted from what is now western Poland after WWII. From his user and user talk pages it seems likely that he belongs to the nationalistic German far right who want to restore Germany's 1937 (if not 1914) eastern frontier. --Angr/comhrá 12:22, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I was a little child when my family was expelled from Schlesien by the Poles - but i still remember the screaming of polish soldiers "schypko, schypko kurva mach!" (something in that way)--Schlesier 14:36, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * yeah... and I still remember the moanings of pain of my co-prisoners at Auschwitz... - Blueshade 07:46, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * thats not funny... milions of Germans were murdered at that time...--Schlesier 13:01, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, while quite a lot of Germans (Jews, Homosexuals, Intellectuals, Jehova's Witnesses...) were murdered by the Nazis, the vast majority were foreigners.--Stephan Schulz 14:40, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vote placement
On a completely different subject, why is this in the article namespace? &mdash;Korath (Talk) 23:36, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

Because Schlesier's a jerk? john k 03:47, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A second old map of Germany - (Warschau is not a German city?...) http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/british_dominions_yearbook/pan_ger_aims_map5_1911.jpg --Schlesier 12:46, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

John who is now the jerk...--Schlesier 12:57, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * LOL.... yeah sure... and Vilnius... or should I say Vilna, is also a German city :))) ... Oh! and don't you forget about Antwerp and Brussels (or maybe Antwerpstadt and Brusselburg ;) )... Schlesier, please... - Blueshade 13:09, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I know its hard to believe, for people who knows only the falsificated history of Europe and Germany..., but this map showing the true borders of Germany.--Schlesier 13:45, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * You never replied to the debunking of this map as a British WWI anti-German propaganda. --Tydaj 16:43, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah so! Ja wohl, Herr Schlesier, mein Personifikation auf die Allwissenheit... Ich wusste nicht das Ich ein Deutsch war... ;))) - Blueshade 14:03, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Das mußt du ja selber wissen, ob du dich zum Deutschtum bekennst oder nicht...--Schlesier 14:46, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * all right... you lost me on that... it seems even the citizens of the truly German lands don't necessarily understand German... but now - let's get back to reality, ok, Herr Schlesier? ... - Blueshade 16:26, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * He said you have to decide for yourself whether you consider yourself German. As for reality, anyone who considers a map clearly labeled "Pan-German aims" to be an accurate indication of what boundaries really were in 1911 obviously has only a tenuous grasp on it. --Angr/comhrá 18:56, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * That's what struck me before but I didn't have time to check ... I could hardly believe Germans had that much land in 1911... and thanks for the translation :)... babelfish helped a bit but only so I could approximate the meaning... not really understand it :) - Blueshade 21:15, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * No, of course they didn't. Just to make it 100% clear, the map linked to above is British propaganda from 1911, showing what the strongest Germanophobes feared the German Empire (Second Reich) would someday look like if not brought down in time. The largest the German Empire ever got (1871-1918) is shown at the map at Image:Map-deutsches-kaiserreich.png, and Warsaw is outside it. --Angr/comhrá 12:59, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Conclusion: Schlesier remains the jerk. The question of whether Warsaw was (or is!) German is utterly irrelevant, in any event. Munich is indisputably German, and yet our article is not at München. john k 22:28, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)