Talk:Casimir Palace

Untitled

Yes, I know it is an English Wikipedia, mainly for English-speaking people from around the world - see and compare: Palais Strousberg, Schloß Pötzleinsdorf, Palais Königswarter, Berlin Hauptbahnhof, Französischer Dom, Stadtschloss, Berlin, Konzerthausorchester Berlin, Zoologischer Garten Berlin, Berliner Dom, Rotes Rathaus, Votivkirche, Augustinerkirche, Jesuitenkirche, Vienna, Ruprechtskirche, Kapuzinerkirche, Dresdner Frauenkirche, Grünes Gewölbe etc, etc, etc... Polaco77 11:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I read on the Main Page "that King of Sweden Charles Gustav was so impressed by Kazimierzowski Palace in Warsaw (pictured) that he even ordered the window frames to be removed and transported to Sweden during the Swedish invasion". But I can't find this in the article. --Wetman 04:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

It had been deleted by someone. It's back now. Nihil novi 18:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Rename

I suggest to rename this article to Casimir Palace, Warsaw or to similar equivalent. As I do not see reason any reason why English name should not be applied. M.K. 13:02, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. I see no advantage to perpetuating this needless and jarring Latinization of Kazimierz to "Casimir." To a bilingual Polish-English ear, it's like calling U.S. President John Adams, "Joannus Adams."

Some of your compatriots objected to Jogaila being called (by his legitimate royal name) Władysław II Jagiełło. Why impose a medieval Latinization on a modern Polish palace (or on a modern Polish king, for that matter)? Nihil novi 20:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I personally find strange why Jogaila case was brought here, probably due to lack of arguments. However, as Jogaila case was mentioned I find obligation for clarification - no "Władysław II Jagiełło" is not "legitimate" name , Jogaila never used this name himself , not even talking about that such letters as "ł" did not existed back then. So this "legitimate" name was invented much latter. Remembering discussions of this case name, Jogaila not even enjoyed support in English academic press but also by English native contributors, or " compatriots" as was expressed here. But lets back to current case of Palace. Let me ask, is there any official web page of Palace? M.K. 09:18, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The Palace is found on the Polish Wikipedia under "Pałac Kazimierzowski," which translates as "Kazimierz Palace." Nihil novi 14:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

It is completely irrelevant about Polish Wikipedia. Some sort of official web page EN variant could draw light. It may even translate name as Kazimierzowski Palace, but we have to investigate it first. M.K. 19:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Unilateral moves, without the minimum of research are not too good. Kazimierzowski Palace is the only sensible rendering of the Polish name, not Kazimierz Palace. Here's why.

• Results 16 for "Kazimierz Palace" - excluding site:en.wikipedia.org [1]
• Results 690 for "Kazimierzowski Palace" - excluding site:en.wikipedia.org [2]

I've renamed the article to reflect the only popular usage of its name. --Poeticbent talk 03:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

A bad decision, insensitive to the differences between the Polish and English languages — but still much better than "Casimir Palace" would have been! (By the way, did you check for the popularity of "Casimir Palace" among the linguistically-challenged?) Nihil novi 04:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

• Results 71 for "Casimir Palace" - excluding site:en.wikipedia.org,[3] almost ten times less popular than Kazimierzowski Palace. There's no contest. And why do you think it was a bad decision to use the most popular name by a mile. I've consulted WP:NCGN. --Poeticbent talk 13:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

First of all under the headline "Rename" there was no consensus, which name to choose. Leaving no space for other contributors to discuss the new suggestions and make one-sided name move, is hardly can be called good editing practice. There is suggestion to use googling "scholarship", so we may find out such results:6 hints in books for Kazimierz Palace, 16 hints in books for Kazimierzowski Palace, 27 hints for "Casimir Palace , almost twice. So question googling books vs googling web pages hints (with Wikipedia clones). Then name variates greatly it is good to consult official translation , for this I asked question about official web page of Palace. No answer delivered, but still waiting.M.K. 14:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I would like to acknowledge you research into Google Book Search, thank you. However, the numbers quoted are lacking overview and therefore are misleading. For example, the first book on your list of 27 hits, written by Samuel Orchart Beeton, was published in 1868; the next one, edited by Daniel Coit Gilman, Harry Thurston Peck and Frank Moore Colby, was published in 1906; the following one, called The Popular Science Monthly was not a book of course (as the name suggests) and it was published in 1891. The next one, edited by Michael Vincent O'Shea, Ellsworth D. Foster and George Herbert Locke came out in 1918. Etc. Those hits are useless. They do not reflect modern day naming conventions. Sorry to disappoint you. --Poeticbent talk 15:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I only disappointed due to lack of good editing practice when one sided move occur.M.K. 10:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

"Modern-day" namings are not necessarily intrinsically better than earlier ones. And all linguistic arguments speak, in my mind, for "Kazimierz Palace."

The Palace takes its name from the Polish given name Kazimierz, sometimes rendered in English from a Latinization as "Casimir." In the Polish, "Kazimierzowski" is an adjective modifying "Pałac"; the corresponding adjective, in accord with English grammatical practice, would be "Kazimierz." (I reject "Casimir" as a Latinization that has seen very limited use in English outside of church and history applications — in the original Polish, it was and remains Kazimierz.)

"Kazimierzowski Palace" is a Polish-English hybrid — neither fish nor fowl.

In seeking an equivalent name, use of statistics has its place in doubtful cases. To me, there is little doubt that the proper English equivalent for "Pałac Kazimierzowski" is "Kazimierz Palace." Nihil novi 20:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I really happy for your efforts explaining these things. While, I still believe when the name is used in so many variations its good idea to find official publications and see how this names translated by them in EN. M.K. 10:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Consideration of "official" name translations, like statistical analysis, can be useful. Neither of these approaches, however, is infallible, while their use can lead to strange inconsistencies. There are, for example, at least eight places in Poland called "Kazimierz," including a historic district of Kraków, Kazimierz Dolny and six villages. If an "official site" were to call one of these "Casimiria," would we automatically adopt that rendering, thus severing the linguistic and historic connection between it and all the other places, and with the given name "Kazimierz"? Nihil novi 19:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kazimierz Palace. 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/20110721085127/http://webart.nationalmuseum.se/work/work.aspx?id=39543 to http://webart.nationalmuseum.se/work/work.aspx?id=39543

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:03, 7 December 2017 (UTC)