Talk:Peskovi

Mountains Low‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Kosovo

	Peskovi is part of WikiProject Kosovo, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Kosovo on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.KosovoWikipedia:WikiProject KosovoTemplate:WikiProject KosovoKosovo articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

North Macedonia Low‑importance

	North Macedonia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North Macedonia 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.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Title

I see this is just among the latest in a move-everything-to-the-Albanian-name marathon, but what's the reasoning? I don't know that there's a way to find which name is more commonly used in situations like this where it's a relatively unknown mountain, at least that's what it seems like to me. The rationale that 'Kosovo isn't in Serbia anymore' doesn't work here since the mountain is at least partially in Macedonia (it's totally in Macedonia according to the mk version which, like this one, is totally unreferenced).

It's purely a coincidence that the article creator named it 'Bistër'. Had its creator named it 'Peskovi' then, I guess, I would call the latest move dubious and undiscussed. --Local hero ^talk 06:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. I've been reverting a series of sneaky, undiscussed moves by a small number of editors who really ought to know better. WP:BRD, and so on.

I would welcome a WP:RM discussion if this means we could develop a consensus for the best title. More sources would be helpful too :-) bobrayner (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That title was stable for 5 years. There was no opposition to 'Peskovi' until you changed it.

I added one source I scraped up on Google books that at least confirms this mountain's existence.

Searching "Bistër" mountain on Google books yielded one result, while "Peskovi" mountain yielded nine results of which three are based on Wikipedia information and four are not in English. For overall web search results, Peskovi had about 217 results to 123 for Bistër.

Clearly this is an unknown place that gets less than a dozen views in a typical month, but, in my opinion, Peskovi is less unknown and the better title. I don't know if a RM discussion is appropriate because there isn't much to discuss here. --Local hero ^talk 00:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for simply reverting the move back and still leaving my comments unaddressed, bobrayner. No one is disputing that 'Peskovi' is the more appropriate title so an RM discussion is a waste of time. --Local hero ^talk 18:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I had assumed that "Try getting a consensus through WP:RM first" and "I would welcome a WP:RM discussion if this means we could develop a consensus for the best title", although very subtle, were sufficient hint that we should use WP:RM. I'll make it explicit: Potentially controversial moves should be done through WP:RM. Unilateral moves are part of the problem, not part of the solution. I disagree with your preferred title, but if the community develops a consensus, I'll happily go along with that consensus. bobrayner (talk) 20:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My move was not unilateral, I explained it here and no one dissented. This move is only controversial for you. Not just at the present time, but for the past five years. And you have yet to explain why you find it controversial. --Local hero ^talk 20:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

This discussion was listed at Wikipedia:Move review on 25 March 2014. The result of the move review was Endorsed, but moved back to Peskovi.

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.

The result of the proposal was no consensus, after being open for more than a month. --BDD (talk) 16:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bistër → Peskovi – The title of this article from February 2009 to February 2014 was Peskovi. A couple weeks ago, bobrayner decided the way in which the move was done (five years ago) wasn't acceptable. In those five years, however, no one ever argued that Peskovi wasn't the best name. For most people, that would make Peskovi a stable title. So, I presented above why it should remain the title and received no dissent but was reverted because it is a 'controversial move' (so controversial that it lasted for five years). Though, if you're looking for bobrayner's rationale for using the current title, it doesn't exist. Here are the points I made above:

Searching "Bistër" mountain on Google books gives one, non-English, result.[1]
Searching "Peskovi" mountain gives nine results, of which three are based on Wikipedia and three are not in English [2]
For overall web searches, Bistër has 127 results
For overall web searches, Peskovi has 208 results
The source used in the article to confirm this mountain's existence uses the name 'Peskovi'

As stated above, not much coverage of this mountain exists, but I do find Peskovi to be the best title. --Local hero ^talk 15:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support If the mountain is located between Macedonia and Kosovo I fail to see why we're favouring the Albanian name over the Macedonian one. Five years sure is a long time for an article title to stay the same. 23 editor (talk) 22:07, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support good reasons given by Local hero. Bandy boy (talk) 01:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the undo was refused as controversial because the article was originally called "Bistër" when it was created in 2008, and the rename to "Peskovi" was a cut and paste move that was fixed but had no discussion. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 08:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE This mountain appears to be in Kosovo (according to Google Maps), and "Peskovi" is the Slavic name, while "Bistër" is the Albanian name. Kosovo is now an Albanian speaking locality, whereas previously it was part of Serbia, a Slavic speaking locality. Macedonia is a Slavic speaking locality with Albanian and Greek speaking populations. Kosovo gained independence from Serbia in 2008, so any references older than that would not use the Albanian name. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 08:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per 70.50.151.11; it's natural that some older sources might prefer a Serbian name, but Kosovo declared independence in 2008. See also the recent moves of higher profile articles like Deçan, Gjakova, and Ferizaj; it seems that we have a broader consensus. By the way, Local Hero, it's best if your move requests focus on an actual reason for moving, instead of sniping at an adversary. bobrayner (talk) 14:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the "new" sources then? Please present them.
Kosovo has two official languages, Albanian and Serbian, in addition to Gorani and Bosnian (both South Slavic languages) being recognised languages
There are also articles where the name wasn't changed despite the partially recognised Kosovo declaration of independence like Istok, Kačanik, and Zvečan; it seems we do not have a broader consensus
Macedonia (the Republic of) does not have a significant Greek-speaking population, just FYI
Looking at the map, in addition to references, this mountain is also in Macedonia
I don't get the idea that no sources would use the Albanian name prior to 2008 even if it was the common name. Was its use banned prior to independence or something?
There are still no valid reasons or sources that suggest the Albanian name is in use more than Peskovi. --Local hero ^talk 16:07, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. There are four official languages, so we must use your preferred name? We needn't base decisions on reasoning like that. bobrayner (talk) 20:40, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, feel free to check out the rest of the reasoning. --Local hero ^talk 20:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator, no solid opposing rationale yet. --Local hero ^talk 19:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You do realise that Kosovo isn't part of Serbia any more, right? I recognise that moving it to a Serbian name would appeal to certain editors, but our article titles must be reality-based. bobrayner (talk) 22:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How many times must I address this invalid argument? Kosovo's separation from Serbia is irrelevant to the naming of this article.

Kosovo has two (2) equally official languages: Albanian and Serbian; Gorani and Bosnian, two other South Slavic languages, are recognised languages in Kosovo
This mountain is also in Macedonia. In Macedonia, Macedonian is the official language.
In South Slavic languages, not just in Serbian, this mountain is known as Peskovi. Why should the Albanian name be given preference?
As I've already stated, however, the basis for using the stable name for 5 years, Peskovi, is the common name policy.

No valid arguments have been given against using Peskovi except for your attempt to create the illusion of controversy by bringing up Kosovo's independence, which doesn't matter here. Do not neglect the fact that Kosovo has no preferential relationship to this mountain than Macedonia does. --Local hero ^talk 03:22, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - pre-independence sources are irrelevant. Also back to Sept 2008 article creation before undiscussed move 03:32, 14 January 2009 Vanjagenije moved page Bistër to Peskovi (revert). In ictu oculi (talk) 23:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh... There are zero "post-independence" sources. There is absolutely zero basis for the current title. Once again, this mountain is also in Macedonia. Your reasoning for opposition is further flawed since, in the post-independent Kosovo, Serbian is a co-official language. Yet, as I have to restate again, Peskovi is the best title because it is used more commonly and used in the source that verifies this mountain's existence on the article. --Local hero ^talk 01:21, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, is there a single reliable English source in existence that calls this mountain "Bistër"? I have yet to find one. --Local hero ^talk 01:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So now your basis for opposition is that there was an undiscussed move of this article in 2008? There was also an undiscussed move that brought us here a few weeks ago. Well, we're discussing it now and, so far, the only argument for keeping this unverifiable title is that "everything in Kosovo should be the Albanian name now". Unfortunately, that idea is not based on any policy, while using 'Peskovi' is. --Local hero ^talk 13:37, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mild support - it would seem that the Albanian name has yet to catch on here. The fact that this is an international mountain complicates things, as I otherwise would probably prefer the Albanian language name, all else being equal. Red Slash 20:15, 15 March 2014 (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.