Talk:Szczecin/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Polish spelling

I dont suppose anyone could make a sound file of how to pronounce Szczecin correctly? PMA 02:00, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
Also just out of interest why are Polish placenames spelled differently to how they are pronounced? PMA 02:05, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
I believe because in Polish, those spellings are phonetically correct, because the letters have different sounds associated with them. Just as "Weimar" is pronounced "Vymar", because German consonants and vowels sound different from those of English, in spite of using the same letters. john 03:11, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

Polish spelling is almost as simple as the spelling in Spanish or Greek: apart from some digraphs it's WYSiWYG. sz is read always as sh, cz is more or less ch, e is always e (as in bet or get, ci is always chi (as in cheers), n is just n. So the Polish name of Szczecin should be read as Shche-cheen, or ʃʧεtɕiɲ in IPA, or StSEchin in X-SAMPA. I think I could prepare a sound file. What formats does wikipedia support? Halibutt 11:37, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

The list of administrative districts

What is your opinion on the list of administrative districts? Should it be moved to separate page (List of auxiliary local government districts in Szczecin, perhaps), or removed completely? Now it adds unnecessary clutter to page. Not to mention that those red links will propably never be fixed. Przepla 17:52, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

I removed said list. Investigaton on official city webpage shows that no such districts exists. Modified it to Rady Osiedla, really functioning sub-city self-government. Przepla 20:09, 29 May 2004 (UTC)

Comment at the beginning

I removed the comment at the beginning. It didn't worked as a discouragement for any further edits of header but also created some controversies, so Ruhrjung felt like it needed correction. As I disagree with that edit and due to reason stated above, I removed it completely. For the record, there is no significant German (or any other, for that matter) minority in Szczecin. German minority (and German minority MP's) are in the Opole region. Przepla 14:25, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Please do not rename Szczecin

The city name used in Polish is Szczecin in modern spelling, at least since 16th century, although the older spelling was also Sztetyn.

The city name used in English is Szczecin, and because it is a big seaport of interntional significance its name is widely known to English speakers. Please do NOT rename the old Polish city with its temporary German name. Thank you.

PolishPoliticians 04:30, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The city is now called Szczecin. It was called "Stettin" both in English, and everywhere else that was not Poland, until 1945. This should be reflected in the article. And why with the constant new user names? Nobody is fooled. john k 04:54, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Stettin is undoubtly the current German name, it doesn't matter how many times the sharlatants will continue to revoke this fact. PolishPoliticians 05:04, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I have no idea what the current German name is. And the current German name is utterly irrelevant - who cares what is the German name of a city not inhabited by Germans? What is important is the fact that the city used to be actually named Stettin, and that this was the name that everybody calls it, and that in English, when discussing it in that period, people still call it "Stettin" in English. But you are never, ever going to listen to anything I say that you don't agree with so why bother? Again, why the constant sock-puppeteering? It's incredibly easy to figure out who you are, and each new sock puppet just makes you less and less reputable. john k 05:07, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

There is only one English name of the city: Szczecin for all historical and moder references. The unoffcial and offical city name was always Szczecin (althout it was not always spelled in this way). If it doesn't matter to you what the German name is, PLEASE STOP pushing it into the article without adding ANY OTHER valubale info. PLEASE ALLOW other users fo develop the Szczecin article. THANK YOU PolishPoliticians 07:24, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

What its "unofficial and official" name was is beside the point. All that matters in an English encyclopaedia is what it was called in English. The fact that the English name was also the German name is completely and utterly irrelevant. (And it's general Wikipedia policy to give cities the names they were called at the time, rather than the modern name, otherwise we'd be talking about the Eastern Roman Empire based in Istanbul and other such nonsense.) Proteus (Talk) 17:33, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I don't know who is the "everybody" who calls the city Stettin. For me the only name for this nice city is Szeczin.

Final compromise solution

I think we are ready for the final solution of all editing issuses at Wikipedia.

  • Rule 1: User:John Kenney is ALWAYS right.
  • Rule 2: if User John Kenney is WRONG apply rule 1.

Please cast your votes now:

Yes

  • Yes, yes, yes, Yes, yes, yes,
  • Yes, yes, yes, Yes, yes, yes, Yes, yes, yes, Yes, yes, yes.

No

  • apply rule 1

Abstain

  • apply rule 1
The above section was written by User:PolishPoliticians. Guessing the age of that user is left as an exercise to the reader. Przepla 20:56, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Rationale for changes

I redesigned the article by re-ordering sections, making those with more info, more prominent and trying to act according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities. I also reverted to community consensus names of the city in the history section. The sections titles are inspired by Norman Davies' book about Wroclaw Microcosm, Portrait of a Central European City, by Norman Davies and Roger Moorhouse (Jonathan Cape, 2002) ISBN 0224062433 (ISBN 8324001727 – Polish translation). Przepla 20:56, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Municipal districs

Once again are inserted. This list is obviously taken from some historic map. Current list is available here: http://www.szczecin.pl/rada/rady/adres.htm, I shall delete it now. Przepla 15:49, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Naturally User:SzczecinCity is seems to be another sockpuppet of User:PolishPoliticians et consortes. I think this is enough. This person apperently have some Szczecin Travel Guide from the 1970s, and inserting outdated material. He broke history of Dabie, insist on stupid idea of Szczecin-Dabie (see: Talk:SzczecinDabie). Dear User:SzczecinCity whoever you are. Please stop, and start to discuss. If you live in Szczecin, we may even meet at a pub and discuss it. I could even pay for your beer. But please stop, doing those changes.Przepla 16:07, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC) SzczecinCity just responded in rational manner on my talk page. Przepla 16:11, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Name debate in History of Szczecin

I'd like to make everybody know, that History of Szczecin currently consists exclusively name Szczecin, which is against community consensus, reached here earlier this year. Since my reverts would cause edit war with User:PolishPoliticians, I'd opted to leave it at current state. Please read Talk:History of Szczecin for additional informations. Przepla 13:25, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I don't know of what concensus you are talking about, but I think this a new meaning of the word cencencus we were not previously aware of. The Wikipedia naming convention is to use the English names in the English language articles (the same in other languages). Once we agree that the English name is Szczecin, all other dabates can be settled withod difficulty .PolishPoliticians 00:10, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Szczecin/Stettin once again

From checking the Talk archives, it seems this issue has already been discussed several times, and there seems to have been a relatively broad consensus to leave in the formerly Stettin at the beginning. Is there any way to reach a consensus before we go back to an edit war? -- Ferkelparade 07:22, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It could be, if the persons opposing the consensus, would condescend to discuss it. Przepla 09:22, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
What, calling me a Nazi when I disagree with him doesn't qualify as discussion? Someone needs to go through the History of Szczecin article and restore proper name usage, too. john k 11:49, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I'd do it, if I would not feel disgusted at this issue now. In real life I try to avoid contact with persons like PolishPoliticians, and I don't want to be involved with him in Wikipedia any more. Wik in his edits showed excellent Wikipedia editing skills and genuine attempt to NPOV, while PolishPolitians' edits are both POV and bad wiki style. Przepla 12:42, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Provided that this system will be used for all cities in the region. Halibutt 11:58, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)

I think everybody agrees that Stettin is the German name of the city. On the other hand the phare formerly Stettin suggest that this is a former name, what is false, misleading and against the Wikipedia naming conventions. I am trying hard to understand your reverts but please don't call it a concensus. PolishPoliticians 00:13, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Until 1945 Stettin was an English name of the city too. Compare Churchill speech about Iron Curtain (From Stettin...). It is no concern of English Wikipedia to list names in other languages than English and native in the header. The unfortunate fact is that Stettin is German name too, which is bad. And how formerly Stettin is misleading? I've got postcards with my city Szczecin, made in it and named Stettin. Manholes still bear the name Stettinerwasserke. Stettin is former name of the city. Regarding consensus, see archive. It was undoubtly consensus. Nevertheless I am happy, that you discuss things. Please, let's continue. Przepla 08:42, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I just requested protection of the page. Przepla 08:50, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Without taking part in the current quarrel, I'd like to suggest a compromise. I understand that the former English name is Stettin. However, the sentence Szczecin (formerly Stettin) might be misleading and certainly is offensive to some of us. Apparently changing it to Szczecin (German Stettin) is also unacceptable to others.
Some argued (User:Wik) that in German language Germans are using Szczecin instead of Stettin, and why we should list German name in English Wikipedia.Przepla 20:14, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
How about changing the header to something less enigmatic, for instance to Szczecin (formerly known in English as Stettin)? Such a solution would leave no place for doubts and misunderstandings and I hope it would allow us to end this dispute once and for all.
I supported that version for the whole time, as is evidenced in comments I inserted and Talk. Perhaps formerly referenced in English by it's German name Stettin, would be acceptable? Przepla 20:14, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Fine with me. Halibutt 17:27, Jul 18, 2004 (UTC)

I still don't see why "formerly Stettin" is inaccurate. The proposed solution would be accurate, but suggests a situation like that with Mainz, which was "formerly referenced in English by its French name Mayence" (which is true, although said references were in the 19th century or so) - that is to say, it gives no sense that the city itself was previously named Stettin, or that Germans ever lived there. I would still like to understand in what sense the name "Szczecin" was not a new name in 1945. john k 17:39, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Nazi symbols and names are criminal offence

Until 1930s a swastika was a glorious symbol of sun used by the ancient Indo-European tribes, but it was profanated by the Nazis. The same applied to Stettin, which wsa profanated by the nazis. Painting Polish cities with these Nazi names is like painting Jewish graves with swastikas. First this is profanation, second this is a criminal offence. PolishPoliticians 20:01, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Dear User:PolishPoliticians, if you believe that I by supporting the insertion of Stettin into the article committed criminal offence please report me to the Police or Attorney Office. My adress data are available at my home page, and certainly can be found by my cell phone number which is also available there. Since I live in Szczecin, the appropriate District Attorney would be the District Attorney Szczecin-Śródmieście, ul. Wawrzyniaka 14, 70-392 Szczecin, telephone: (91) 4252-807. In short, I call your bluff. You might want to hurry, since after October 1, I am going to be an attorney trainee (without pay), at this or Szczecin-Niebuszewo district. Thank you. Przepla 20:48, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I thank you for agreeing with my previous arguments -- since you didn't chalenged them. Nevertheless, I am open to resolve current issue via neutral arbitrage. Przepla 20:48, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Could you explain how Stettin was profanated by Nazis? I use Stettin since you use that name instead of only permissible name Szczecin. Przepla 20:48, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Additional clarification. I only support usage of Stettin within the header because of Churchill speech about Iron Curtain. Przepla 20:53, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This argumentation is very chidish and naive. I'm talking about this Nazi BS. I am for using just one name throughout the article, but for the sake of logic, consistency and educational value, not because the other way is offensive. It might indirectly lead to offensive stuff (as we have seen over the past years, and that's another reason for ONE NAME way) but cannot be seriously considered offensive, unless you happen to be ridiculously emotional. Przepla, I don't think one stupid speech is reason enough to support the "formerly" instead of "German". "Formerly" indiretly implies that Szczecin was invented in 1945. I hope you know that it's not true. Have to finally go to sleep. Bye y'all.Space Cadet 02:20, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Space Cadet wrote: "Formerly" indirectly implies that Szczecin was invented in 1945.. Now I finally understand why is some people against phrase formerly Stettin and why is that Nazi arguments are brought back again. User:PolishPoliticians: Are you sharing this view? Przepla 20:08, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

SC, while Stettin may have been called "Szczecin" by Polish people before 1945, I don't see how that's relevant. That was never the city's name. In the pre-German days, it had been called "Stetin", apparently. In 1945 (or whenever - 1946, maybe?) a city named Stettin became a city named Szczecin. It had never been called Szczeczin before anywhere except among Polish people (presumably). To say that this name is not new is like if the French had taken over Mainz after World War II, kicked out its inhabitants, brought in French people, and renamed it Mainz, and French Wikipedians were then insisting that we not use the construction "Mayence (formerly Mainz)" because French people had always used the name Mayence, and Mayence was actually closer to the ancient Roman name of the town (with the ancient Roman presence proving, of course, that the city had really been French all along). This seems like silliness. I disagree with your arguments on this score at Gdansk, but I can understand what you're getting at.1 But Gdansk was at one time a Polish city before 1945, and had been known as Gdansk to Poles, and so forth. Stettin had never really been Polish before 1945 - it had been part of a Slavic-speaking Duchy of Pomerania, but that was centuries and centuries back, and even then it hadn't been called "Szczecin". So I don't see your point.

1Although I'm not sure of your basic premise. If we had "St Petersburg (formerly Leningrad)," would that imply to you that the name St. Petersburg was made up in 1991? john k 21:49, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

St Petersburg (formerly Leningrad) seems to be OK because the city was indded renamed by the Russians. This NOT the case of Szczecin. The city name was always Szczecin, at least for the last 1000 years or so. The problem is the early Latin documents had no 'sh' and 'ch' sounds so the people wrote Stetin/Stitin/Stetyn/Stettin etc. As soon as the Polish language started to be written in the 16th century, the city name was spelled Szczecin and this is the proper city name (1000 years ago and today). PolishPoliticians 22:44, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Nevertheless, Szczecin was called by its inhabitants Stettin for a substantial period. Przepla 23:57, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Szczecin was named Szczecin fot the last 1000 years

Szczecin was named Szczecin fot the last 1000 years or so. In times the Latin speakers had difficulty in spelling the city name correctly they spelled it Stetin and the st letters meant shch sound, the same as Bydgostia for Bydgoszcz, Since the modern Polish language was invented in the 16th century the city name was spelled Szczecin, and I don't see why we should still use the outdated Latin spelling of Stetin for the city name in the present day publications. PolishPoliticians 23:41, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Szczecin (yet another consensus proposition)

Co myślisz, o umieszczeniu w nagłówku takiego zdania: formerly referenced in English by it's German name Stettin? Jeśli wyrażasz zgodę, napisz na Talk:Szczecin. Przepla 09:42, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Jestem raczej przeciwny sytuacji, gdy artykuł prawie kazdego polskiego miasta ropoczyna się od nazwy niemieckiej. Propnuje aby dyskusje na temat łacińskich/niemieckich/francuskich/staropolsich nazw miejscowości przenieść do sekcji City name/Nazwa miasta, gdzie mogą być w pełni przedyskutowane. Nie widzę powodu dlaczegoby w nagłówku tłumaczyć jakieś starocie, natomiast nie widzę przeszkód aby zaproponowane przez Ciebie zdanie znalazło się w sekcji City Name, gdzie uzupełni tamte informacje. PolishPoliticians 22:29, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Ale co jest złego w nazwie niemieckiej? Jakoś artykuł na temat Lviva zawiera polską nazwę, bo przecież w historii Lwowa, Polska odegrała dużą rolę. Podobnie Niemcy odegrały dużą rolę w historii Szczecina i dla części anglojęzycznych osób Szczecin to nadal Stettin. Przepla 23:52, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Synopsis in English: I am trying to convince User:PolishPoliticians to new compromise, this is written in Polish because it was moved from PolishPolitician's talk page. Sorry for breach of ettiquette. Przepla 23:52, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Po pierwsze polska nazwa nie jest hitlerowska, po drugie nie ma fałszywej formuły (former Lwów), tylko prawdziwą Polish:Lwów, po trzecie nie ma tam próby absurdalnego nazywania miasta róznymi nazwami w róznych okresach historycznych. Myślę, że możemy się zgodzić na formułę:

back to English: I think we can all agree to the formula:

What do you think? Co o tym myślisz? PolishPoliticians 02:58, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Fine with me. Halibutt 05:17, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)
We don't need Latin and Kashubian name. Romans and Kashubians never live here in Szczecin. We don't need German name either, since this is English Wikipedia. What we need is to inform English speaking readers, that in their language Szczecin was called Stettin some time ago. Perhaps (sometimes known as Stettin). Przepla 09:08, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
You said: Polish name is not Nazi. I agree that forcing Poles to use German name can be Nazi, but this is not the case. Przepla 09:08, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Formerly Stettin is not misleading. In Polish it was always Szczecin (with variations in spelling), in German it was always Stettin (altough some argued that it is changing now). But in English it was formerly Stettin and it is English Wikipedia. I've got a PC game called Patrician III, when Szczecin is named Stettin on the map and Szczecin in game messages, as apparently game designers wouldn't agree on proper name. (Gdańsk is Gdansk, not Danzig though). Przepla 09:08, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
However, please take note that formerly Stettin and formerly known in English as Stettin do not mean the same. Similarily, former Prince is not the same as formerly known as Prince. Halibutt 09:48, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)
Good point. Nevertheless I believe that in case of Szczecin both statements are factually correct. Przepla 11:18, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yes...I would agree with that. The question is, I suppose, whether the fact that the city was formerly Stettin is important enough to mention in the intro (I think that "formerly known in English as Stettin" is implied by "formerly Stettin" unless one is told otherwise)...I would say that, assuming it's true (which I think it is) there's no reason not to mention it. john k 11:49, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Exactly. formerly: Stettin might imply much more while formerly known in English as Stettin (or some similar frase, for that matter) leaves no place for a doubt - and no place for controversy and constant reverts. Moreover, that's exactly what we want to say: that the town was known to the English-speaking world as Stettin some time ago. It's rather undisputable.
I must say that I'd be equally satisfied with German Stettin since such a frase is also 100% correct and leaves no place for doubts. Halibutt 16:55, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

Wik was the one who really hated "German:Stettin", arguing that Szczecin is now the German name...at any rate, I'd agree to German:Stettin, assuming the article explains why the German name is notable enough to be mentioned. But I'm still confused about why you oppose "Formerly Stettin". In what sense was the city not formerly named Stettin? john k 17:08, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I explained it to you a zillion times. I oppose usage of "formerly Blahblah" in all cases but the most explicit (like Petrograd/Petersburg/Leningrad case). In some instances it might be misleading and using such frase as a de facto wikipedia policy could lead to problems. The case of Szczecin is much simpler since the Slavic name has not been used by the city inhabitants since late 18th century, but I'm more frightened by other articles. Halibutt 02:08, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)

I am looking at various popular English language atlases. A 1968 large format atlas has a map showing the city as "Szczecin (Stettin)" and the region as "Szczecin", while the index has both "Szczecin" and "Stettin (Szczecin)". It treats many other European cities similarly, e.g. "Warszawa (Warsaw)" indexed as "Warsaw (see Warszawa)" and "Warszawa", and "München (Munich)" indexed as "Munich (see München)" and "Munich". I also have a small format 1988 English language atlas using only "Szczecin", "Warszawa" and "München", whereas a third 1980s atlas uses "Szczecin (Stettin)", "Warsaw", and "Munich (München)". Based on this, it seems to me that Stettin has been a recent English language name for Szczecin. The German language Wikipedia also uses Stettin (de:Stettin), in conflict with User:Wik's attributed theory. Is anyone else baffled as to why this naming is not so controversial in the Polish language Wikipedia where it was recently added (pl:Szczecin)?

I value the English language Wikipedia as a resource for finding information on topics from older English language sources, and am glad to see a redirect from Stettin. I also believe that where redirects are in place, the alternate topic name should be mentioned in the destination article to explain the redirection. I support the formerly X style in introductions, which can be expanded in the articles. In general, names in other languages are already available indirectly from the inter-language link list, but I see the need to include related namings in articles. While I would also accept text in the article explaining the emotional impact of the former name on some people, to avoid repetition I would prefer to see more general separate articles covering topics such as Polish nationalism and sensitivities, and post-WWII perceptions of German and Japanese language, companies, goods, currency and tourists by various groups. --Zigger 06:29, 2004 Jul 25 (UTC)

Honestly, for a city with so much German history it is MANDATORY to include a German name in the first sentence. What the name was in English may also be interesting to some people and a brief information on it should find it's place in the article. Now, if it's really that important, then spell it out: "Formerly known in Eglish as...". This way nobody will think that Szczecin is a brand new name invented in 1945 like Kaliningrad. Space Cadet 05:01, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The simple term "formerly" includes both the meanings "formerly known in English" and "German name", since the reason it was formerly known in English as Stettin is because the city was formerly inhabited by Germans. As to Kaliningrad, I agree it's different. But I don't see how application of a name used by people from a foreign country does not amount to a name change. I return to my previous example, not responded to: if, after World War II, the French had annexed Trier, changed the name to "Treves," would you then agree that we should not saz the city was formerly named "Trier", just because the French had always called it Treves, and Treves is closer to the old Roman name "Augusta Treverorum", anyway? - john k(in weird internet cafe, not sure how to get the tilda to work)

So we now have German Stettin, can we consider this the new consensus? Przepla 17:22, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Fine with me. Halibutt 18:26, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)
I feel confused, and don't get what it's all about. Are people in Stettin still using that name? If so, I think it's perfectly OK. Compare: Helsingfors, which still is an official name of that bi-lingual town. In that case, it seems reasonable for me to inform the reader on the first line that Helsingfors is the [[Finland-Swedish|Swedish]] name of Finland's capital. If Stettin is held to be currently correct to say in English, then "Szczetsin or Stettin" would seem appropriate to me. I believe a reasonable compromice might be "until 1945: Stettin" without any explecite references to neither English nor German language or to any specific year when the town is believed to have become known under its German name, but ...for God's sake, the most important thing is to try to arrive at a principle that can be used also in other articles and for articles on towns outside of Poland.
Ruhrjung 06:33, 2004 Aug 2 (UTC)

Changes after unblocking

For the record I expect that phrase until: 1945 will be controversial since it's basically the same as formerly. German Stettin is better since it avoiding the problem of name changes completely, yet providing information about that name. It is controversial also to me, but I believe that we can work it out without edits war. Przepla 10:02, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Are people in Stettin really still using that name? If not, then I suspect you'll have to explain in the text why a German name is relevant, ...and wouldn't that explanation be equally much controversial? I don't want to appear rude, but aren't you now making problem just for the fun of making problems? (Or as it maybe would be expressed by Poles: Aren't you now discussing just for the fun of discussing?)

"Also known as:" is of course a posibility, but it seems equally much inviting to amendment from passers by; and amendments to the introductory paragraph is exactly what we do not wish from unexperienced editors. --Ruhrjung 11:10, 2004 Aug 4 (UTC)

Of course we in Szczecin, don't use name Stettin. I believe that mention of Stettin is relevant because that for some people Szczecin is Stettin, (like for me Sri Lanka is still Ceylon). The fact that name Stettin should be mentioned is further supported by the fact that most (if not all) online 'cyclopedias are having redirects from Stettin to Szczecin. See archived discussion about that. I think I can say that most of involved people does not question mentioning Stettin in the header since for some english speaking people it is still name of the city. The controversions are how to mention it. One could argue, that the name of the city never changed, but the official languages of that city changed (at least twice). In fact, German: Stettin was here initially, but we changed it to avoid discussions and reverts with Wik. Personally, I am (I believe) quite flexible on that issue, since formerly or German or formerly known in English by its German name or variations of thereof suits me well. The phrase until 1945 implies for me (much stronger than formerly), than name was changed -- it wasn't, the inhabitants changed. Solution with German Stettin is similar to Lviv, where similar ethic movements took place and all those name are listed. It is true that current version bothers me, but not enough to incite another edit war on my home town article -- I can live with that version. So, I am not making problems, I am just anticipating them, and I have a reason given this article history. Przepla 13:12, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Of course the importance of the German name should be (and is, IMO) well explained in the main body of the article (History section being the best place, I presume). [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 18:37, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)

@Przepla

  1. The former English name needs to be bolded and I'm not going to tolerate that it is obscured in any way
  2. It is important to point out in the introduction that the city was part of Germany until the end of the second world war (note that it didn't live a single Pole in Stettin before the war)
  3. The city was part of Prussia continously until 1945. "Third Reich" is a Nazi propaganda term, like "the best democracy in the world" or something, not a state different from Germany.
  4. Ethnic cleasning of all original inhabitants by the Polish communist regime needs to be mentioned. Burschenschafter 00:09, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)


  1. The former German name must be mentioned, but bolding it seems way too much. Do you see any mention of New Amsterdam on the New York page?
  2. If we include historical info in the header, then it also must be noted that the city was a part of Slavic Western Pomerania. However, I believe that such a piece of information belongs to the history section, not to the header.
  3. Just as it is continuously a part of Pommerania since early middle ages. This belongs to the history section or the geography section, not to the header.
  4. The term "ethnic cleansing" is misleading (if not false) and the matter is too complex to be mentioned in the header. Otherwise we'd have to change the header of Germany article to mention the millions brutally murdered by this nation during WWII. Makes no sense to me. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 01:44, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)


  1. Regarding bolding Stettin, I am not touching this issue. I spent way too much time discussing the header. I can live with constantly changing Stettin to Stettin, and back.
  2. Regarding mentioning that this was part of Germany, why is it important? We, Poles, don't insist on mentioning that until WW II Lviv and Vilnius was part of Poland.
  3. Well, I believe that the term Third Reich is used to distance current Germans from their grandfathers sins. Most Germans don't want to be associated with Nazi regime. And I agree with them. Current Polish-German relations at the western border of Poland are excellent.
    1. While we are at it: Szczecin wasn't returned to Poland, neither it was annexed by Poland. It was awarded to Poland by Allied powers. Poles would much liked to retain Lviv and Vilnius, than to receive this land.
    2. It is dangerous to use such statements, that no a single Pole lived here before World War II. In Szczecin until 1939 there was some Polish minority. Even Polish scouting troop existed here. And to support Polish minority in Szczecin there was a consulate of Poland in Szczecin. The building in which it was still exists and it is located at Monte Cassino street.
  4. About ethnic cleansing. I am really sorry that it took place. Really I am. The stories from German citizens of Szczecin: rapes, murders commited by Soviets are terrifying (Polish authority arrived at Szczecin on August 5 1945). Then again the same thing happened at Poland's eastern border. Poles were packed to trains and shipped to land taken from the Third Reich.
    1. It is not the like that I am want to shift responsibility from Polish govvernment to Soviet, but at least some of those atrocities commited were done by the Soviet Army. At least until 1950 Soviets behave here like it was their own city. For instance, first Polish firefighter killed in Szczecin was killed in an accident when fire truck collided with Soviet Army jeep disregarding fire truck's sirens and lights. To pacify Polish community, the firefighter (called Firlik) was declared a hero, and a street nearby fire fighters HQ is named after him.
  5. The history of this land is really very complicated. The scars are at both sides, and every crime commited by Polish side can be countered by crime commited by Germans. Why then argue who was more hurt? Przepla 10:30, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Moved from Archive 1

Moved from Archive: Comment by 192.38.238.168

The name of the city is Stettin, it has always been like that and it will always be Stettin. Szczecin, is a name that was forced into use by the communists. That doesn´t change the reality that Stettin is Stettin, is city that is part of the germanic speaking area of Europe, though the communists annexed it from its people.