Talk:Commission for the Determination of Place Names

German population was expelled

False, German minority exists in Poland.Xx236 (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

These two statements do not exclude each other. Most were expelled, a little minority remained. --Thathánka Íyotake (talk) 23:16, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Nazi-era settling of place names

Thousands of places obtained Germanised names under the Nazis, see [1]. Many of the old names were restored after the war. Xx236 (talk) 13:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC) An example [2]. Xx236 (talk) 13:40, 25 August 2009 (UTC) University of Königsberg created thousands of new names, why this work isn't described in this Wikipedia but the one of the Committee for Settling of Place Names is?Xx236 (talk) 13:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The first item is really useful, shame it is in the ppt format - here's google browser-accessible cache: [3]. Do note that it discusses both germanization and polonization; it seems to me like a very useful resource - and I love the Silesian language poem at the end. Thanks for finding this, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

See also pl:Germanizacja nazw w Prusach.Xx236 (talk) 07:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Then please create an article about the Germanisation of Polish place names too. Both subjects are toponymically interesting. --Thathánka Íyotake (talk) 23:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Removal of info

I find it disturbing that certain German editors keep removing information about 1) existence of Polish speaking minority in those territories and 2) about anti-Polish language policies of the German state. The article which does not inform that there were Polish speakers living there, who preserved Polish names of local toponyms for centuries, and that the lack of Polish names on "signs, documents and so on" was the result of discrimination against the Polish language by German authorities is quite misleading. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:09, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely agree with Piotrus. This is outrages and unfortunately not new to me. I appeal to all German editors to review their edits and pay special attention to the nationalistic German POV influenced edits regarding the subjects of shared Polish-German history. Thank you. --Jacurek (talk) 19:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The key point, of course, is shared. Nobody is denying the significant amount of German culture and history on those territories - but unfortunately, some editors do try to deny (or at least, minimize) the amount of Polish culture and history that also coexist that. I hope this shameful behavior will stop soon. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

• Well, as I'm probably one of those "certain editors", I'd like to stress I used Jun Yoshioka: Imagining Their Lands as Ours: Place Name Changes on Ex-German Territories in Poland after World War II as a source and almost everything I wrote is based on his article. I don't think it's appropriate to call Yoshioka a "German nationalist" or someone who pushes German nationalistic POV.
• If a source states the usage of German-language roadsigns in that part of pre-war Germany was a result of the discrimination of the Polish language or the Kulturkampf, feel free to add it. Unless a reliable source is provided, I will continue to remove it (WP:OR)
• I added the part about Masurian and Silesian names (the IP was me, I forgot to log in or was kicked out, I don't know). Your accusation of minimalizing the "Polish" background is unsubstantial. A lot of placenames even in modern Germany have Slavic roots, however Masurians and Silesians often used Polonized forms of the German names, which were not accepted by the Committee (Jansbork, Rastembork etc., Gregor Thum, "Die fremde Stadt" explicitely mentions Liegnitz and the discussion whether Neisse should be renamed Nisa (Committee suggestion) or Nysa(Silesian))
• The image showing German soldiers in Gdynia might be somekind of "prelude" but has no direct conjunction with the Committee as Gdynia was part of pre-war Poland and wasn't affected by the Committee's decisions. The image implies the Committee just reverted the results of German wartime actions.
• Calling the usage of German roadsigns a result of the German "administration" of the area is far away from NPOV, just as calling Masuria in the 1930's "German-controlled".
• @Piotrus: "Shamefull behaviour" is a term we shouldn't use here. HerkusMonte (talk) 07:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I am all for AGF. I am sure we can find plenty of sources for German discrimination of Polish (and other Slavic) languages in the pre-war era, although most of them belong in the Germanization article. Could you stub Jun Yoshioka? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

the remaining German population was expelled

False. A German minority in Poland exists till today, after a number of emigration periods. After the war many Germans weren't allowed to emigrate, because they were useful as workers.Xx236 (talk) 07:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC) The same paragraph describes the facts.Xx236 (talk) 07:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Image of Gdynia

Gdynia is not in the area the commission settled placenames for. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:00, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, it was certainly a place where the German equivalent of the commission existed. Do you know its name, and does it have a wiki article? I am referring to the body (bodies) that were responsible for Germanization of placenames during Imperial Germany, and Nazi Germany times. I'd support moving the image to their article(s). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

A "long" time ago, I had introduced this image to History of Pomerania 1933-1945, it is also at the article about wartime annexed territories.

Regarding a Nazi German rename committee, there was none. The following is derived from Thomas Maier, Die onomastische Waffe in Posen (in German), pp.25-27: Actual renaming of places was performed on a local basis since 1939, without special guidance by the authorities. The Reich Ministry for Inner Affairs then called to stop all renaming in December 1939, and asked the local (Nazi German) authorities to come up with proposals. In May 1941, the Reich Minister for Inner Affairs per decree settled the names of counties and their capitals, yet these names did not make it into actual usage, and the ministry again called for proposals. In the Warthegau, some county capital names were finally settled by a decree of the local Reichsstatthalter (Arthur Greiser) of September 1942, and the other names in this gau were settled by another Greiser decree of May 1943. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Monika Choroś and Łucja Jarczak state ([4]) that Germanization of names occurred before 1939. Talking about Silesia, they note that while in 1933 only two settlements were renamed, about 20-30 where renamed each year in 1934-1935, and in 1936, 1088 (!). Renamings in 1936o occurred mostly in Opole region, and those in 1937/1938 in Wrocław and Legnica regions, where 359 and 178 were renamed, respectively. Interestingly, they don't really discuss events of 1939-1945. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I think it's necessary to differentiate between the pre-war renaming in pre-war Germany and the renamings in the Polish areas annexed by Nazi Germany. Referring to pre-war Germany such renamings happened already in the 1920s (Oletzko/Treuburg in 1928, Zabrze was actually renamed Hindenburg in 1915). Concerning East Prussia the local populace voted on the new name case-by-case even after 1933 (Kossert)(without the option to use the old name of course). In 1938 a major renaming-campaign happened, not legitimised by a voting anymore. The situation in the annexed areas was different, as parts of these territories were part of Germany up to 1919 and had its German names (however changed by Greiser as outlined above). HerkusMonte (talk) 05:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree there were certainly different phases; this should be discussed in an article somewhere. Till we find out names and refs for German equivalents of this Polish commission, Germanization, perhaps? What do you think? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:44, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Renaming of places by Prussia and Nazi Germany

The sources given do not specify if they refer to the area in question. Most of the renaming took place in the Province of Posen (Prussia), later Warthegau and Danzig-West Prussia (Nazi Germany). These areas were not affected by the commission's work, as these areas were Polish already between 1919 and 1939, and thus Polish toponyms existed which after the Nazi rename of 1939 were just put back in place in 1945. Please verify that "thousands" of places were renamed in the area covered here. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:00, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, talking about Masuria some names of Old Prussian and Slavic origin were renamed to "German" ones already in the late 1920s and a lot more in 1938, that's true (see Kossert, Masuren). I'd like to add: In 1938 many place names of Slavic or Old Prussian origin in East Prussia and Silesia were renamed to purely "German" toponyms by the Nazi German government ref: Kossert, Andreas: "Masuren. Ostpreußens vergessener Süden". Pantheon. ISBN 3570550060. (German); Unfortunately my changes were kicked out several times because of edit conflicts. Is this a possible consensus? HerkusMonte (talk) 08:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I am not saying there were no renames, but now the article suggests that the German placenames originated from Prussian/Nazi renames of Polish toponyms, which maybe true for a minor faction at the easternmost frontier, but is else insignificant. Can you provide an approximate number of how many places (within the former German East as of 1937) were renamed by the Prussians/Nazis? Skäpperöd (talk) 08:26, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a look. HerkusMonte (talk) 08:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

According to the article in Polish Wikipedia "Thousands" in East Prussia only, more than 1 000 in Silesia.Xx236 (talk) 08:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC) There are German sources in Germany listed here [5].Xx236 (talk) 08:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC) [6] Kossert.Xx236 (talk) 08:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

"Olecko [ɔˈlɛtskɔ] (deutsch bis 1928 Marggrabowa (umgangssprachlich auch Oletzko), 1928–45 Treuburg)" - de:Olecko - so not only after 1937.Xx236 (talk) 08:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Kossert gives a number of 1500 for all of East Prussia, but this includes the modern Kaliningrad oblast, where a lot of Old Prussian/Lithuanian names existed. For Masuria I found only examples like 62 villages in the district of Ortelsburg or 102 in the district of Lyck. In the district of Lötzen 47 percent were already renamed prior to 1933 and another 36 percent afterwards. Maybe it's adequately described by the term "many". HerkusMonte (talk) 08:54, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

A German guide says "More than 1000 places". "Thousands" include other geographical names, not only places.Xx236 (talk) 09:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC) A source about "Little Lithuania" [7].Xx236 (talk) 09:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

known in Poland as Regained Territories

Not only. Xx236 (talk) 09:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Now rather "Ziemie Zachodnie i Północne" - Eastern and Northern Lands.Xx236 (talk) 10:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Not Western? —Tamfang (talk) 01:08, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Recovered Territories

The article is named "Recovered Territories" and Yoshioka uses this name (not Regained).Xx236 (talk) 09:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I think both terms are/were used, User:Piotrus preferred "regained" [[8]]. HerkusMonte (talk) 10:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't say preferred; check Google Books to see which is more popular - I never checked, but would support whichever is. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:55, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The problem should be solved in Recovered Territories rather than here.Xx236 (talk) 06:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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.

The result of the move request was not moved. Jafeluv (talk) 07:06, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

---

Committee for Settling of Place Names → Committee for Settling of Place Names in Poland — Title should reflect that this committee only applies to Poland. Bobanni (talk) 19:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

• Move back to Polish Committee for Settling of Place Names - I agree with the nominator's rationale, but I liked the original title better: Polish Committee for Settling of Place Names, as the article was named by its creator. The trouble I have with "...in Poland" vs "Polish..." is that "in Poland" suggests that the comittee was occupied with all of Poland, while in fact it was only occupied with former German territory. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)/Skäpperöd (talk)
• Oppose. Unless a disambig is needed, there is no need to add details to the title (one could as well argue that we need a date in the title - but we don't). See Wikipedia:NC#Be_precise_when_necessary: Name an article as precisely as is necessary to indicate accurately its topical scope; avoid over-precision. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

  Is here a native speaker? "Polish" means for many people shoe-polish, doesn't it?Xx236 (talk) 06:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

  ...no, not in English. In English, "Polish" is a proper noun to describe people from Poland.
  — V = I * R (talk to Ω) 12:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

  It's proper, but first guess for many people is probably shoe-polish.Xx236 (talk) 09:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

  No, that's not true. Native English speakers just won't confuse "polish" as in shoe polish with "Polish". I can see how thinking that could be a problem is possible, but context and pronunciation make the distinct meaning of each word very clear.
  — V = I * R (talk to Ω) 11:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

• Neutral, the official name lacks of course the term Polish or Poland as it was a Commission of a Polish Department without the necessity to stress the term "Polish". However I chose the initial name to make it clear, which area/country was affected. I think, in general official authorities of a single country have some kind of national attribution even if it's not their official name (e.g. Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Poland (Polish: Ministerstwo Gospodarki), but as the creator I prefer to stay neutral.HerkusMonte (talk) 06:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support There are a number of Place Name Committees ie Denmark, China, Norway, Ireland, Australia, United Nations, Estonia to mention a few. Bobanni (talk) 06:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

• Create articles on them and then we can consider disambiguation. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose — IAW WP:DAB, as cited above. Unnecessary disambiguation is to be avoided. If there are other Place Name Committees, and creating an article does end up clashing with this article, then we can handle that when the time comes. Until then, this article should stay.
  — V = I * R (talk to Ω) 12:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - Per user Piotrus.--Jacurek (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose Unnecessary at this stage. If we ever get articles on committees in other countries, then will be the time to consider a move. Skinsmoke (talk) 02:37, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - yet another completely pointless proposal. Loosmark (talk) 09:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose. Another example of Bobanni's wasting time of other editors. If there is a need for disambiguation, then we can add the adjective Polish. But so far it is not necessary. Tymek (talk) 19:01, 31 August 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

German names

Grabow is probably a Germanised Slavic name. Polonisation (reslavisation) of Grabow is a different task than Polonisation of a really German name. Xx236 (talk) 08:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Prussian names only in Prussia

No Prussian names in Silesia, which isn't obvious from the article.Xx236 (talk) 11:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Commission for Place Names

A better English rendering than "Committee for Settling of Place Names" would be "Commission for Place Names", which is more compact while conveying the same idea. "Commission" has a more official ring than "Committee". And "Settling" (which is superfluous in the proposed rendering) sounds like a choosing from among rival proposals—whereas there may in some cases be only one, e.g., a historically accepted, choice. Nihil novi (talk) 07:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Amend the above RM or start a new one? Skäpperöd (talk) 07:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I thought about "Toponym commission", but Yoshioka uses the term "Committee...", so it would be OR to create a different one, wouldn't it? HerkusMonte (talk) 08:01, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Why would "Commission" be more OR than "Committee"? Nihil novi (talk) 08:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

"Toponym Commission" might be a viable alternative too. Nihil novi (talk) 08:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

It's just because Yoshioka is the only english-language source and it's not up to WP to create new terms, however I agree Yoshioka's translation of the Polish term isn't "perfect". HerkusMonte (talk) 08:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Whoah! Hold on! What is the direct English translation of the original Polish name? It would be acceptable to use that; it is not acceptable to start inventing English names that we may think would have been better, if only someone had thought of them at the time. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

With next to zero knowledge of Polish, and using online resources, it appears to me that the correct translation is Commission for the Determination of Place Names or, alternatively, Commission for the Determination of Locality Names. In any case, most definitely Commission rather than Committee and Determination seems pretty straightforward as well. There is a possibility it could be Commission for the Determination of Municipal Names as Miejscowości appears to derive from Miasto (English: City, Town or Municipality), but I suspect that is taking it back to its original root. Skinsmoke (talk) 18:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

The Polish "miejscowość" ("place," "locality," "town," "village") doubtless derives from "miejsce" ("place"). And "miasto" ("city") is no doubt also cognate with "miejscowość" through "miejsce" ("place"). This is made more evident by the adjectival form of "miasto" ("city")—"miejski." The Polish expression "zamiast" ("in place of," "in lieu of," "instead of") provides further collateral illustration of these derivations.

As the article points out, the Commission's purview extended beyond cities to include other "places," such as provinces ("voivodships"), counties ("powiaty") and "transportation crossroads." Thus, "Commission for the Determination of Place Names" is about as accurate a literal translation as we might wish. A translator, however, considers not only accurate literal meaning but also the characteristics of the languages between which he is translating—one of these characteristics being the length of the expression. Here the Polish original comprises 4 words; the latter (accurate) English rendering, 7. That is why I had suggested "Commission for Place Names"—which leaves out "the Determination of," without, in my opinion, altering the essential meaning. Nihil novi (talk) 04:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes but, all of this has a troubling WP:OR quality to it. I'm also bothered by this conversation being moved to a section outside of the movereq above, which to this outsider suggests some sort of WP:OWNERSHIP issue is occurring here. Aren't there English sources which cover this?
— V = I * R (talk to Ω) 04:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

AFAIK this section was never moved anywhere [9]. Skäpperöd (talk) 06:26, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The point is, the above move request is irrelevant, as it seeks to address the wrong concerns. Both renderings discussed there are inadequate. If you have alternative published English renderings of the Polish Commission's name, kindly bring them to our attention. Nihil novi (talk) 05:38, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

That's actually (one of) the reason(s) that I !voted Oppose above.
— V = I * R (talk to Ω) 06:10, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Google returns only a few English hits for this commission/committee, including

• The prime source for this article (English) uses Committee for Settling of Place Names.
• This catalogue [10] translates it as Commission for Establishing Names of Localities and Physiographic Objects.
• Here [11] it is translated as Committee for Establishing Place Names
• Here [12] it is translated as The Commission for Establishing Names of Localities and Physiographic Objects

I think the above shows that there is no established English usage, and thus we are "free" to choose the best possible English translation of the Polish original without this being OR. Skäpperöd (talk) 06:26, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I think so too. Nihil novi (talk) 07:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Have to agree. To move forward, are we agreed that Komisja is definitely Commission rather than Committee, and that Nazw Miejscowości is accurately rendered as Place Names? If so, that only leaves us to settle Ustalania. In English, I doubt very much that you would have Settling rather than Determination in the name of an official body; it's a more informal term and somehow doesn't seem as exact. As to word order, it would be normal in English speaking countries for the Commission to go at the end of the phrase, giving Place Name Determination Commission, but that just doesn't sound quite right, though the more I look at it the more acceptable it appears to be (Place Name Settling Commission looks and sounds horrendous). Skinsmoke (talk) 13:41, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

While I like "Toponym Commission" for its conciseness, that version does seem to represent a higher level of abstraction than other alternatives under discussion. On balance, I would propose rendering the Commission's name in the article's lead as "Commission for the Determination of Place Names," but in the article's title as "Commission for Place Names" (13 syllables versus 6, for two titles that denote the same thing). Nihil novi (talk) 14:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Ideally, the name used in the lead should be the same as the title per the Manual of Style. I don't think you need to worry about the extra syllables; we've had The Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales here in the United Kingdom, which equals it for syllables! (trumps it if you include the The, which was formally part of the title}. Skinsmoke (talk) 15:11, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Excellent. If such prolixity is good enough for Wales, it is certainly good enough for Poland! Nihil novi (talk) 03:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Pursuant to the above discussion, I propose that, if no objection is raised within a few days, the article be retitled to "Commission for the Determination of Place Names". Nihil novi (talk) 01:51, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

No objection having been registered, I have moved this article from "Committee for Settling of Place Names" to "Commission for the Determination of Place Names". Nihil novi (talk) 23:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

B-class review

Quickfail due to insufficient inline reference density. That said, only a few cites are needed for this to be B-class, with a GAN potential. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:48, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Commission for the Determination of Place Names. 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/20120226195018/http://www.ifp.uni.wroc.pl/zasoby/kp/Rospond/wypow.htm to http://www.ifp.uni.wroc.pl/zasoby/kp/Rospond/wypow.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 17:30, 28 November 2016 (UTC)