Talk:Drevlians

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Cuchullain in topic Requested move 25 March 2015

Move edit

This page should be moved back to Drevlians. That is a better name for it. The current name does not reflect English conventions at all.Johnpacklambert 21:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

200,000 in 1861? edit

200,000 Drevlyans were counted in the 1861 census? Sounds dubious. 1982vdven (talk) 03:38, 29 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Name edit

  • "Drevlians" (262)
  • "Drevliani" (100)
  • "Drevlyans" (93)
  • "Drevlyani" (9)

Gbook hits.--Zoupan 16:37, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 25 March 2015 edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Cúchullain t/c 14:09, 21 April 2015 (UTC)Reply



DrevlyansDrevlians – Proper naming. As per above section. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:10, 2 April 2015 (UTC) Zoupan 16:37, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

  • Support not that it greatly matters but the usage in Scholar is also at approaching a 2:1 ratio in favour. Even though it was an early tribe (and I could be wrong on this but), the "..yan" ending seems to suggest something from folklore. GregKaye 14:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Support: Ngram (here) also suggests Drevlians is the predominant term. Ebonelm (talk) 22:33, 2 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.