Talk:Sanjak of Syrmia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sanjak of Syrmia article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Former countries: Ottoman Empire

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Ottoman Empire.

Croatia Low‑importance

	Croatia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Serbia Low‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Name[edit]

"Sanjak of Syrmia" -Llc (all language) - 0
"Sanjak of Srijem" -Llc 2
"Sanjak of Srem" -Llc 2
"Sanjak of Sirem" -Llc 2

Takabeg (talk) 13:05, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So, do you proposing that name of this article is changed or what? Name "Syrmia" was agreed by several users long time ago as best possible name for this region in English language and therefore articles related to this region are using this name. PANONIAN 16:10, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, when we find common name, we must change it. Do you konw Wikipedia:No original research ? Takabeg (talk) 02:37, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I am not sure if a couple of Srem versions can be considered as "established usage" in sources on English language the way it is explained in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). In that case maybe we should leave the existing name of the article because it looks like proper translation of local name to English language.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Takabeg, you should probably read this discussion where name "Syrmia" was agreed as best possible name for this region in English: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Syrmia#Name All Syrmia-related articles are made in accordance with that agreement. PANONIAN 17:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:53, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjak of Syrmia → Sanjak of Sirem – per WP:COMMONNAME & Wikipedia:No original research

At first, Syrmia is acceptable. But Sanjak of Syrmia is sourceless original naming ("Sanjak of Syrmia" -Llc (all language) - 0).

"Sanjak of Srijem" -Llc 2, both are written in English, one of them was printed in Croatia and other was printed in Bosnia.
"Sandjak of Srijem" -Llc 1 (Branislav Djurdjev, "The kanun-name of the Sandjak of Srijem of 1588/89")
"Sandzak of Srijem" -Llc 1
"Sanjak of Srem" -Llc 2
"Sandjak of Srem" -Llc 0
"Sanjak of Sirem" -Llc 2
"Sandjak of Sirem" -Llc 1

As long as I know, "Common names" were not established. In this situation, I prefer Sanjak of Sirem because it is closest to the original name. Takabeg (talk) 04:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There is hardly any prevalence in sources. - Darwinek (talk) 07:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we must avoid original research as possible as we can. If you insist on using original sesearch by any means, we must add the note: "This title is one of the original titles created by Wikipedians" for readers. Takabeg (talk) 09:09, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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