Jump to content

Talk:Czech Republic/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10

Protected edit request on 15 April 2016

I would like to suggest we replace the current pronunciation of Czechia with the following pronunciation, as the current pronunciation is not by a native speaker.:

Pronunciation of the short English name of the Czech Republic - Czechia

A Nebraska Cornhusker (talk) 20:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree, that's much better, sounds like a native English-speaker. Rothorpe (talk) 21:08, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
I recorded the current audio file and I agree that the proposed audio file is equivalent in spirit to what supporters of the name "Czechia" believe to be right in Czechia itself, and may be used as an improvement given the authenticity of the speaker's English. Well, I feel that it sounds a bit too close to the Russian pronunciation – Czechs imagine the stress on the first syllable to be less visible – but the English word is ultimately designed primarily for the native speakers so it's clear that the details should be decided according to the natural pronunciation from the native speakers' viewpoint. Lumidek (talk) 21:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
I support changing the audio link to this version. The existing version does not sound like a native English speaker. Kaldari (talk) 21:50, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
If Czechia in the lead stays then yes, as said above, proposed version is much better, current version speaker is Czech. Chrzwzcz (talk) 21:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

It does sound better, yes.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:06, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done Fixed. Thanks. – Kaihsu (talk) 16:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 16 April 2016

Please edit the pronunciation of "Czechia" in the intro. The the Pronunciation respelling key does not match the IPA pronunciation (this has been discussed above as well with support for this change). The pronunciation respelling key should be corrected to show stress on the first syllable and the correct final sound as follows: {{respell|CHE|kee-ə}} which will show CHE-kee-ə. (The marked up text for the relevant line would be: also known as '''Czechia''' ({{IPAc-en|audio=Czechia,_official_short_name_of_the_Czech_Republic,_pronounced_by_a_Czech_speaker.ogg|tʃ|ɛ|k|i|ə}} {{respell|CHE|kee-ə}};, which would read "also known as Czechia (/tʃɛkiə/ ⓘ CHE-kee-ə;") Thanks. —  AjaxSmack  03:55, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


Would someone attend to this request, changing to CHE-kee-ə, please? Rothorpe (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done Fixed. Thanks. I also fixed the missing stress in the IPA. – Kaihsu (talk) 16:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

That's good, many thanks. Rothorpe (talk) 16:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. —  AjaxSmack  03:17, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 19 April 2016


REMOVING QUESTION MARK - ? is used only in English translation.

| national_anthem = {{vunblist |{{native phrase|cs|[[Kde domov můj]]|nolink=yes}} |{{raise|0.35em|{{small|''Where is my home?''}}}} |{{center|[[File:Czech anthem.ogg]]}} }}

ThecentreCZ (talk) 16:13, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done  — Amakuru (talk) 16:24, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 21 April 2016


Grammar correction, misuse of semicolon in opening:

The Czech Republic joined NATO in 1999 and the European Union in 2004; and is a member of the United Nations, the OECD, the OSCE, and the Council of Europe.

to

The Czech Republic joined NATO in 1999 and the European Union in 2004, and is a member of the United Nations, the OECD, the OSCE, and the Council of Europe.

149.157.114.236 (talk) 10:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Done There is already an "and" in that sentence, so I fixed it a different way while keeping the semi-colon. Is that okay with you? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Sure, thanks 149.157.114.236 (talk) 13:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Name change on the horizon?

According the NY Times (here) the Czechs are proposing a new name for the country: Czechia. Which makes logical sense, very few entities require one to specify their form of government to denote them (the UK is another, I suppose).

Obviously we have to go with current usage. But something to keep an eye on. Herostratus (talk) 08:33, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Your "obviously" statement is obviously incorrect. While controversies are guaranteed to exist for some time, the renaming is already work in progress and two paragraphs above this comment of yours at the Talk page, there is already a voting process about the renaming of the main page to "Czechia" while "Czech Republic" would be redirected. Two days ago, the "Czechia" supporters could have seemed weak. But now the top politicians in Czechia agreed to do something about the promotion of the short name for apolitical situations. It may be a matter of days when a formal verbal note is filed with the U.N. Such a process is likely to get through without problems. If the U.N. takes it seriously, events such as conferences and, much more importantly, the Olympic Games in Rio could already be expected to use the term Czechia in all situations where France is used instead of the French Republic, and so on. It seems obvious that the momentum powering the advocates of "Czechia" is strong and may increase in coming days, weeks, and months, so if some opponents of "Czechia" are at least slightly neutral, maybe they should abstain from unnecessary edit wars. Lumidek (talk) 10:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I was just making a driveby note. No, it actually doesn't much matter what the Czech government calls it, it's what notable sources call it. BTW there's no need to be rude, you know. I was trying to be helpful. Sheesh. Herostratus (talk) 10:53, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
I wouldn't agree that your criterion about "notable sources" is right (even though other sources will probably pick Czechia as well, after similar controversies as those we participate in here). The rules for Wikipedia titles [1] demand recognizability, naturalness, precision, conciseness, and consistency. Recognizability and naturalness work well for Czechia because it's clearly a country name derived from the well-known adjective "Czech". It's precise because it's been newly defined to represent a very particular territory. It's more concise than the Czech Republic, and it's more consistent because many more countries have articles named -ia than "some republic". The overall result is that if Czechia becomes officially okayed as a possible correct name of the country by the Czech political establishment (an OK by the government is waited for), it's more suitable as the main title than the Czech Republic according to Wikipedia's rules. Lumidek (talk) 11:06, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
It doesn't really matter if you don't agree that my criterion is right, because it is right, and that is what matters. I'm quite closely familiar with the Five Virtues of WP:TITLE. Your argument comes down to "people call this entity by a name I find illogical and displeasing, therefore we should change it". It's a timewaster of an argument. (Heh, there was a comic just a few days ago at XKCD (here) exactly on the subject -- look at the first entry.) Your argument comes down to "Hey, I have a better idea for a name for the Czech Republic!" ... Herostratus (talk) 11:14, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Hilarious comic and so true in many ways. IMO we should wait and see how the name change goes and catches up. I trained myself to use Denali instead of Mt McKinley the very day they renamed it. --Killuminator (talk) 13:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
  • To be clear, the country isn't being renamed. There is only a plan to adopt an official short form. "Czech Republic" will continue to be an official name, and I tend to doubt the bastard "Czechia", formed from the Polish-derived "Czech", meaning Bohemian, and the Latin root "ia" will catch on in common English usage. If the Czech government were smart, they would capitalise on the historical name "Bohemia", which is both beautiful sounding and evocative. Complaints about "Bohemia" only referring to Bohemia proper are nonsense, as "Bohemia" in a broader usage has existed in English for centuries, and because "Czechia" is just as much derived from the name of Bohemia (i.e. the Czech name Čechy via Polish). Regardless, there isn't much discussion to be had until there is evidence of a change in common usage. RGloucester — User talk:RGloucester 13:26, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
To User talk:RGloucester You have apparently zero knowledge about the origin of the name. Old Czech had the same digraphs "cz" as Polish and both those languages were very similar. Later, Czechs decide to change spelling. The name Czechia has origin in Latin by standard suffix -ia, with the first record in the beginning of 17th century, English took the term over in the first half of 19th century. The meaning of the name Bohemia today is different from the past, today Czechia = Bohemia + Moravia + (Czech) Silesia.
But, the most important thing. As soon as the name will be registered in UNGEGN Geographical Names http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/geonames/, you have to fully respect it. It is absurd, that some anonymous people from Wikipedia feel some right to decide about the names of countries. The history of Czechia is almost 1500 years old, the republican system in our country only less than 100 years. We have right to use geographical name the same way as other nations, not some transient cumbersome political one, which steals the overwhelming majority of existence of the Czech state ! Moreover, when other languages use commonly geographical name of our country, almost identical with Czechia - Chequia, Tchéquie, Tchéquia, Cechia, Tschechien, Tjekkiet, Tsjechië, Tsjekkia, Tjeckien, Чехия, Cehia, Τσεχία, #צ'כיה (read chekhia). The name "Czechia" is a correct translation of the geographic name "Česko", which is registered by the United Nations and included in the UNO Gazetteers of Geographical Names Blanicky 07:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
As soon as the name will be registered in UNGEGN Geographical Names, you have to fully respect it. Umm, no, we don't. If you look at the UN maps you will see that they list Côte d'Ivoire, Timor-Leste, and Cabo Verde. However, en.wikipedia.org uses Ivory Coast, East Timor, and Cape Verde. This isn't because "some anonymous people from Wikipedia feel some right to decide about the names of countries", but because the general usage in the English language is to use those forms and not the ones the countries themselves prefer. It is possible that Czechia will become common usage in English now, but it is also possible that it won't. And it still would not be an insult like you seem to perceive it as. As much as any country has the right to determine what it calls itself, so too do language communities have the right to decide what to call countries. The only limitation is that you cannot call a country by a name that is (in and of itself in your own language) insulting in some way. So, while the English speaking world does not have the right to refer to the Czech Republic as "Assholia" or "Stupidstan", it does have the right to decide not to use Czechia. I'm not saying that Czechia won't become standard English, only that you cannot say that it SHOULD become standard English. That is beyond your or the Czech Republic's power. --Khajidha (talk) 11:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
"Khajida", your personal opinion is already known for very long time, you do not like the name personally and have deleted it all the time from Wikipedia. Official statement of anglophone countries obviously declared the willingness to respect English form of geographical name of our country. Now, it is officially done. Finally. It is not about standard, but about the right. We have right to use it in Wikipedia and you cannot make abstructions as you do. Btw. I ignore your hidden insults, I understand you are angry. The main page of our country in Czech is called Česko, it means it should be approprately translated into English and Czechia should be the keyword. This is what it is. Stop your demagogy. Jan Blanický 15:25, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Um, no. You have COMPLETELY misunderstood my position all along. I neither like nor dislike the name Czechia and I actually think it would make writing easier if it were commonly used in English. However, as long as it is not commonly used in English sources outside of Wikipedia it is inappropriate to use it on wikipedia. What I have been fighting is the attempt by you and many others to tell the English language community what it MUST call a country. I am offended by your attempts to force my language to follow your rules. I do not go to the Czech site and tell the community there what they should call my country. As far as "hidden insults", I made none. If you were offended by my examples of names that the English speaking community is not allowed to call countries, then I apologize, for it was my intent to show that such insults are not acceptable. --Khajidha (talk) 17:54, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Czechia formed from the Polish-derived Czech? Czechia comes from Latin not Polish. The first recorded use of Czechia is from 1634 in Latin and 1841 in English.Geog25 (talk) 19:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't think this is right. The "official name" of Greece is the Hellenic Republic but the article is under the short name. -- Evertype·✆ 16:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
It's under the most common name in English, which is the standard. Official names, common native or foreign language names, disputed names, short names, long names, and names following correct non-English orthography in some language or violating it can all be the most common name in English, but for the purpose of article titles they must stand or fall on actual usage in English. Even the sourcing requirements are only there to enforce verifiability, they don't override the requirement for common usage. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 17:18, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but I was only pointing out that there was no rule saying that the long name would have priority, ever. In a matter like this, quantification is of course impossible. (I wonder why they didn't pick "Czechland"...) -- Evertype·✆ 17:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
To Evertype We did not "pick" anything, the name Czechia has 400 years tradition with the origin in Latin. There is not any choice. "Czechland" is a neologism. Though, thank you for support. Your example with Hellenic republic is "classical" Jan Blanický 07:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Jan Blanický is absolutely right. Vaclavjoseph (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Jan Blanický is making a lot of sense. – Kaihsu (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Spelling

Why is it written Czechia and not like Checkia? What does the cz really stand for, as a sound, in english? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.245.246 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 25 April 2016‎

@77.218.245.246: I think the section Czech Republic#Etymology already discusses this point! Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Not really. It states that the local form in Czech was written like that until there was a spelling reform almost two hundred years ago, in 1842. It says nothing about how this came to be the accepted form in English, well after that local spelling reform. I don't think the country was called Czechia or anything like it in English before the creation of Czechoslovakia after world war I, in 1918, and this was much later than that spelling reform. It would be interesting to read about the reason for the English form. Skogsvandraren (talk) 16:41, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
You're assuming there was any real reason. The local form was probably utilized by those few English speakers who discussed the language and the people before the spelling reform and that form was probably maintained through the English language's general resistance to spelling change. In other words, "that's the way it was spelled when we borrowed it, why change it?" --Khajidha (talk) 17:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
It's named Czechia after forefather Čech (a brother of Lech, the first Pole) who founded the Czech nation some 1200 years ago by legends. In the Czech language, the name of Čech is not only spelled but also pronounced with "ch" at the end [English speakers could transcribe the sound as "kh"]. The "Cz" at the beginning is transcribed to English as "Ch", it's been written as "Cz" by the early 15th century when John Huss reformed the spelling and introduced the diacritical signs and "cz" became "č" (the diacritics was later also adopted in Slovak, Baltic, Yugoslav, and a few other languages). "Czechia" is an old name used in Latin documents at least from 1604 and English is supposed to import this whole Latin word. Despite the Czech origin of "cz" – with our old spelling rules – Wikipedia misleadingly mentions that "Czech" is an English word of Polish origin [2]. Poles are the only ones who find the spelling "Czechy" natural today. Lumidek (talk) 08:39, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Actually it's the OED, not Wikipedia, who claim "Czech" to have been borrowed from Polish, so burden of proof is now in your court. If English really did borrow the word "Czech" from the Czech language pre-Hussite spelling reform, we would expect to see some English sources using the word from that time, but there don't seem to be any. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 06:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Why you should call our country CZECHIA

Czechia (read "checkia") is the English short name of the Czech Republic. It is the English equivalent and translation (in proper transcription [ˈtʃɛki.ə]) of the short name "Česko" [ˈtʃɛskɔ] in Czech. The name was registered by the United Nations and included in the UNO Gazetteers of Geographical Names when the Czech Republic was formed in 1993. The name "Czech Republic" is the administratively-political name of the current state formation, while "Czechia" is the denomination for the Czech state as a more than 1200 years old geographical and settlement-historical unit, which is independent of actual political regimes.

Czechia (Česko) consists of three historical lands: Bohemia (Čechy), Moravia (Morava) and Czech Silesia (Slezsko). In the past, the entire country used to be called Bohemia in English. The term Bohemia originated from the Latin name of the territory that was settled by Celtic tribes Boii before the arrival of Czech tribes into the Czech territory. Consequently, the Czech people and their language were formerly called "Bohemian" in English. The term Czechia was first used in Latin at the beginning of the 17th century and the first evidence of its use in English is from 1866. The name was also commonly used in the United States in the first half of the 20th century during the existence of "Czechoslovakia" for the Czech part of Czechoslovakia and in historical meaning by newspapers, such as the New York Times or Herald Tribune.

Thus, the name Czechia is not completely new and has a long tradition in English. Foreign countries and their politicians expressed their willingness to accept and use the short name Czechia when the Czech Republic was formed in 1993. In other languages, the equivalent of "Czechia" is commonly used (Chequia in Spanish, Tchéquie in French, Tschechien in German, Chéquia in Portugal, Cechia in Italian, Чехия in Russian, Tjeckien in Swedish, etc.). Why then do we refuse to use Czechia in English and continue to mistakenly translate the short name Česko as "the Czech Republic"? The history of our country did not start in 1993 when it officially became the Czech Republic. The great Czech composer Antonín Dvořák - inter alia the founder of the American classical music in the 19th century - was not from the Czech Republic, because such country did not exist in that time, but he was from Czechia. Czechia is not so hard to learn and it is much easier to pronounce than Czechoslovakia, which so many people still remember today and pronounce with ease. Therefore, we do not see any problem in using Czechia by English speakers.

Some people call our country "Czech", which is wrong. "Czech" is an adjective, the name of the inhabitant of Czechia and of the Czech language, but surely not the country name. English speakers do not use French for France, Japanese for Japan or German for Germany. So, please, remember that we are not from Czech but we are from Czechia.

http://www.czech-this.net/articles.php?req=read&article_id=111 http://czechia-initiative.com/czechia_name.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.207.24.162 (talk) 19:31, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Your entire post is an essay attempting to promote the usage of Czechia, but that is not what Wikipedia or this talk page is for. Current English usage is Czech Republic for the current state and a mixture of the Czech lands, "the region of the current Czech Republic", Bohemia, and other historical names for prior eras. Wikipedia will change if and when English usage changes. Until then, your attempting to school the English speaking peoples in the usage of their own language is massively rude and likely to result in a further resistance to this change. --Khajidha (talk) 12:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Since when the English speaking people decide how other countries are being called even in English? Did they decide on Belarus, Lithuania, Eritrea, Sri Lanka, Myanmar etc.? You are way off here. Countries themselves decide how they are being called and not foreigners. Your last sentence is massively rude and reminiscent of colonial and imperial practices. If and when the Czechs let the world know that they want to be called Czechia in addition to the Czech Republic, the world is going to respect it. Obviously, some Czechs like to use the short name for their country in appropriate contexts including the Czech president. You and your friends pretend that this is not the case and have been deleting any mention of Czechia on Wikipedia, which is a form of rude censorship.Geog25 (talk)
Since the English language began. ALL languages decide what to call foreign countries when referring to them. SOMETIMES the word used is the same as that used by the populations of those countries, sometimes it is similar and sometimes it is completely different. This has been true in all languages since the beginning of time. English speakers decided to use some of those that you mentioned, but Myanmar is STILL not the common English term. Again, expecting to be able to speak my own language without some foreigner saying that I should use THEIR words instead of my own is NOT rude, it is basic self determination. It is YOUR determination to force your words onto others that TRULY smacks of imperialism. I do not know what Czechs do in their own language and do not care what they do in their own language. IT IS NONE OF MY BUSINESS how Czechs name countries in their language, just as it is NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS how the English language names countries. Mention of Czechia has not been deleted, it is simply not used much because the English language doesn't use it much. In this it is much like the term "Usonian", a proposed national designation for citizens of the United States that never really caught on. --Khajidha (talk) 15:20, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Khajida, your responses reek of intellectual snobbery and general international disregard. Wikipedia is, whether you like it or not, a publication, and publications have to take editorial decisions - informed decisions - and these decisions are inherently political. Moreover, it should be up to a specific country what they wish to be called. If a person changes their name from Jake to David, and wishes others to refer to them as David, then it is ignorant and rude to insist they are called Jake. With this in mind, I don't see why the New York Times has more authority than the elected leader of the country in question. That is truly US-centric thinking, and not particularly healthy either. Amphibio (talk) 13:51, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
1) Wikipedia is a publication IN ENGLISH. General English usage does not include "Czechia". 2) Your analogy fails because a country is not a person, it is a thing. 3) The New York Times is an English language source, the president of the Czech Republic isn't. 4) Not US-centric, English language centric. --Khajidha (talk) 14:05, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
English is an international language, is the predominant language of the internet, therefore it needs to be internationally aware. Also, look up the definition of analogy.
It's officialy called czechia now, so you can stop arguing. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36048186 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezrabuo (talk • contribs) 17:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


Ladies and gentlemen, please feel free to ignore the post above exhorting the use of "Czechia". It's been a matter of some minor debate nationally that there is no single-word name for our country (yes, I'm Czech) in common use (not even in our own language, as "Česko" (basically Czech for "Czechia"), the natural candidate, is ambiguous in that it has historically referred mostly to the region of Bohemia, and not the entirety of present-day Czech Republic; personally I'm unsure whether Bohemia or the whole country is meant whenever it's used). For that reason, some PR afficionados and tourism industry professionals formed a drive to determine and endorse a single-word official name for the Czech Republic. Their efforts have gone largely ignored by the bulk of the population, however, and no one I know actually uses "Czechia". (Personally, I find the word ridiculous and wouldn't use it if they paid me to.) If anyone's interested, the word we use to refer to our country in common speech is "Čechy", which however is indistinguishable from our word for Bohemia, and therefore has to be interpreted from context (also, some inhabitants of Moravia and Silesia, the other two major regions of the country apart from Bohemia, are sometimes grouchy about the use of this word for the whole country, feeling "left out" due to the fact that the word can also be interpreted to mean Bohemia only... hence, the drive to find a different single-word designator). 89.102.133.166 (talk) 20:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello everybody, please ignore lies. Here is true: Translations in dictionaries: CZECHIA >> ČESKO, ČESKO >> CZECHIA http://czechia-cesko.webnode.cz/slovniky/

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.80.21.8 (talk) 19:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

To 89.102.133.166's POV : If somebody does not have any argument, only feelings, false subjective impressions, personal quasi-aesthetics, contrived assumptions and myths, there is no other path, than beg for ignoring facts. Jan Blanický 17:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Very funny discussion, nobody should be using Czechia, there are around 9'000 fans on Facebook, www.facebook.com/CzechiaCZ; diverse boards existing on Pinterest, what about checking first before writing nonsense? Czechia is as ridiculous as Slovakia, Slovenia, Russia, Serbia, Macedonia; Croatia, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Colombia, India and so on. If Czech administrators of Wikipedia keeping deleting all articles about Czechia, it is a typical cause and effect misinterpretation, suppress the word wherever you can and then declare it is not used, if something is ridiculous, this kind of logic is it definitively. Helveticus96 (talk) 19:06, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Again, show us the usage in the English language press. When the New York Times writes about Obama going to Czechia, then we will change it. Wikipedia reflects general English usage, and that is "Czech Republic". --Khajidha (talk) 19:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Is the president Milos Zeman ot an authority enough? He is using Czechia constantly, as well as www.czechtourism.com has started using Czechia again. You can keep deleting and suppressing as much as you like, the logical term will come through in the end, as it is convenient as brand. It took 20 years for Cesko, another 20 for Czechia....Helveticus96 (talk) 07:13, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

"Is the president Milos Zeman ot an authority enough?" Honestly? No. Usage by Czechs, even the president, is of little relevance to English language usage. Again, get mainstream English-language (primary language) sources to use it. Change the nameplate at the UN. Get the NY Times, BBC, etc. to use it. Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, follows general usage. It is these sources that need to be changed first. --Khajidha (talk) 11:00, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
No, Miloš Zeman is absolutely not an authority on English usage.[3] – filelakeshoe (t / c) 18:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Nor is the New York Times... --Bermicourt (talk) 09:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

However, I can understand argument of Khajida, there is not any reason to hide here the existence of the name, its spheres of the use and problems in its disputing, as well as constant erasing of relevant references about the name and preference of misleading information (can be documented). In general (for use in some encyclopedy) the name "Czech republic" (contemporary state formation since 1993) is simply (ane more than obviously) NOT enough to describe the country with more than 1100 years long history. Equally, the division of every issue into two categories (Czech lands 9th century - 20th century vs. Czech republic 1993 - now) is awkward uniqueness, because the country is the same settlement-historical unit all the time. In addition, the denomination "Czech lands" has never been used in English, neither in Czech (České země) as the name of the country, only as some periphrasis (here as some circumvention). CZECHIA is a geographical name of the country, thus, it is unifying element of the historic and thematic line. The struggle against the name is irrational, making only complication and negative aftermath. Only some shortsighted, mentally restricted, masochistic or completely irrational person (personal taste is absolutely irrelevant) is able to ask and encourage the use of only transient political name, which (belonging only to political language) steals historical context of the nation and country, because it relates to actual state-political formation only. Nobody else in Europe solves such a kind of problem. Every country has simulatenously political and geographical name, but uses second one, because it is natural and neutral, thus, it is able to describe the location without limitations, only some Czechs are able to go against their own interests, which is embarassing disgrace. To use Czechia is a matter of common sense. Because of that neverending story of blindness, maybe it is necessary to repeat and emphasize: "the Czech Republic" is only time-limited denomination of the kind of state-political formation in the country (nothing less and nothing more), "Czechia" is the denomination of the Czech state as a whole without limitation by time and political status? I hesitate to believe somebody is not able to get it. Understanding of the difference of meanings requires really only minimal demands on intelligence...... Diggindir (talk) 06:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

All great arguments but not for Wikipedia. (After my own "fight" I can tell you) Wiki may agree with all this, but its purpose is not to help with this. And I hope admins won't block the change then they will be given evidence of usage they demanded.
What are current goal of Czechia supporters on Wiki? To change name of article (and all references of Czech Republic)? You can't be serious it would be approved.
To mention it in first sentence? It would not pass either (not even with "rarely used" confession).
To fully describe why it should be used in section in the middle of the article? Answer would be "not interesting enough for English readers".
And the main thing: Would any of that really help with spreading of name Czechia and make any difference? Maybe if all Czech Republics on Wiki were changed to Czechia, but you can't expect Wiki would do that. For promotional purposed, video on YouTube will be more effective than Wiki, I guess. Chrzwzcz (talk) 21:40, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

This is the root of the problem: You are attempting to utilize Wikipedia to spread the usage of Czechia, but that is not what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is for recording facts and is supposed to follow usage, not set it. The facts are: 1)Czechia was proposed and 2)it was not actually used much in English. This is already in the article. All of these protests about how it should be used are pointless and inappropriate. --Khajidha (talk) 16:03, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
1 190 000 hits on the Internet obviously means that it is "not actually used much in English". I would like to know how many hits there must be for Wikipedia administrators such as Khajidha to allow the use of Czechia on Wikipedia beyond its simple mentioning. Also, I would like to know whether you have the same standards for other terms. Obviously not. Geog25 (talk) 10:26, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I can't say it any better than WP:GOOGLE: "Raw 'hit' (search result) count is a very crude measure of importance. Some unimportant subjects have many 'hits', some notable ones have few or none, for reasons discussed further down this page. Hit count numbers alone can only rarely 'prove' anything about notability, without further discussion of the type of hits, what's been searched for, how it was searched, and what interpretation to give the results."--Mojo Hand (talk) 21:59, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Are those English language only sites? Are those sites written by native speakers or by non-native speakers? How many of those sites are simply people saying that the English language should use Czechia? When I run the search, the ENTIRE first page of results is nothing but 1)simple definitions of the word (Wiktionary specifically describes it as "rare") or 2)sites that are designed specifically to lobby for the increased usage of the term. I do NOT see news stories with actual bylines in Czechia. There are no "President of Czechia announces....", "Economy of Czechia experiences....", "Take your next vacation in Czechia", etc type stories. The word is not being used, it is being explained and lobbied for. Call me when that changes. --Khajidha (talk) 04:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Should the article be changed to "Czechia"? We certainly call it "Τσεχία" (Tsehia) in Greek.

And what bearing does Greek usage have on the English Wikipedia? English isn't Greek and Greek isn't English. Czechia is all but unknown in English language sources, particularly those produced by and for the native English speaking population. --Khajidha (talk) 14:47, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
The name of the article could still be "Czech Republic". But not even mentioning the short form in the first sentences is absurd. You treat the short form like som "f-word". It is totally absurd. --Muniswede (talk) 10:07, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
I see the "f-word" in English sources FAR more often than Czechia. --Khajidha (talk) 10:12, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

The Czech Foreign Ministry encouraged the use of "Czechia" today, so we'll probably eventually switch to that, but I'd keep this at "Czech Republic" as long as that's the most common English name. It's not disrespectful to the Czechs; it is the official name of the country translated into English. One of the articles said that they just are tired of the country's name being rendered (incorrectly) as "Czecho" or "Czechland." Jsc1973 (talk) 14:42, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

As and when the term "Czechia" enters common usage in the United Nations and its respective organs, including references in General Assembly meetings and resolutions, Wikipedia should likewise conform. --Katangais (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

It's actually up to English speakers what we call other nations. We say Germany not Deutschland, Netherlands not Nederland, Denmark not Danmark, Spain not Espania, Greece not Helas. Similarly we don't get pissy about French saying Londres not London. It's just what grown up nations do. Bohemians may call their nation whatever they like but they can't force speakers of other languages to conform. Particularly when the name they've chosen sounds absurd to English speakers. Gymnophoria (talk) 16:51, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Czechia now in UNGEGN (July 5 2016)

The short name "Czechia" is now in UNGEGN as of July 5 2016: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/geonames/ Kind of makes most of this discussion moot and the name should be changed in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiri.bohac (talk • contribs) 08:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Except that there is no provision for Wikipedia to follow UNGEGN. I'm pretty sure that UNGEGN doesn't use Cape Verde, Ivory Coast, or East Timor either, so there is plenty of precedent for us to follow our own rules. --Khajidha (talk) 12:39, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
@Khajidha: I would say wikipedia preferences are
officical formal name < official informal name (if known and used) < unofficial informal name (if known and used)
maybe with the exception Republic of Ireland where formal name is used to differentiate between Iraland state and Ireland island (my view would be to rename Ireland-> Ireland (island) and Republic of Ireland -> Ireland, but of course it is not up to me). Or some other exceptions maybe.
Anyway I am not expecting that all or any article names should now change Czech Republic to Czechia even though Czechia is now as official as it can be (right?).
But I would expect en wiki to be more tolerant to Czechia in some cases, e.g. hypothetical Czech book "Česko a Česká republika" translate like "Czechia and Czech Republic", not "Czech Republic and Czech Republic". Or TV show Česko hledá SuperStar - which contains explicitly short Czech version of the state - translate using short English version. Chrzwzcz (talk) 16:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a tertiary source. We do not advocate usage - we reflect it. Czechia is the official short form name, so we properly reflect that. Czech Republic remains the common name for the country, so we continue to reflect that until/unless Czechia becomes the common name. It's really that simple.--Mojo Hand (talk) 17:21, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
In the first case you mention, of course we would use Czechia. The meaning is lost otherwise. The second case would probably still be translated as Czech Republic because that is the English common name. Czechia simply isn't used to any real degree in outside sources so it isn't used in running text here. --Khajidha (talk) 21:30, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
I had a similar problem on dewiki where some users, linking to the map on ungegn, tried to bring this news in the last days. After I have asked on the cswiki, see perma diff, I've got some links like reuters.com/... or trt.net.tr/francais/europe/... and so, imho, it is possible to insert this in the wikipedia as I did in dewiki [4]. Cheers, -jkb- (talk) 22:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Rarely known as Czechia

I am very reluctant to bring this topic up again but I noticed that the lede says that the Czech Republic is "rarely known as Czechia". The use of the word "rarely" is a bit ridiculous given that the sentence is at the very beginning of the article. "Also known as Czechia" was more appropriate. There was a consensus here that Czechia would be mentioned in the lede, but when paired with "rarely", I see no point in mentioning Czechia at all. It appears that someone was reminded of the topic of Czechia now that it has been registered with the UN as an analogous name for the Czech Republic. Although it may not be popular with some people because of subjective feelings, Czechia is now officially the short name for the Czech Republic and that is a fact. So would it be possible to change "rarely" back to "also"? A Nebraska Cornhusker (talk) 18:39, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

The word also is misleading, implying some kind of reasonable frequency as a synonym (e.g., "Mumbai; also known as Bombay, ..." or "Maize, also known as corn, ..."). As clearly pointed out earlier (e.g., Herostratus's "... take a look at this chart") the name Czechia has no reasonable frequency that balances it with "Czech Republic". In fact, it's statistically equivalent to misspellings. I have no objection to it appearing in the lede, but we should be honest about its functional non-equivalence. Doremo (talk) 19:39, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
I almost changed the text to "also officially though not commonly known as Czechia". It's accurate, but it feels a bit stilted.--Mojo Hand (talk) 20:17, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Doesn't listing Czechia as second, after "Czech Republic" imply its functional non-equivalence? (Although "Czechia" is rarely used compared to the usage of "Czech Republic", it is in fact legally equivalent to the Czech Republic)A Nebraska Cornhusker (talk) 20:58, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Not to dance too many angels on a pinhead, but there's really no such as a "legal" shortform in another language. Czechia is simply the English shortform preferred by the Czech government. Clearly we should acknowledge and record that information, but Wikipedia uses the common name over the legal or official name in almost all cases - see WP:COMMONNAME.--Mojo Hand (talk) 22:20, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Listing second doesn't imply anything about a term being rare (in addition to Mumbai/Bombay and maize/corn above, other examples are color/colour, organization/organisation, etc.). All of these are in active common use, whereas Czechia is a statistical flatliner. Doremo (talk) 03:02, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps "The Czech Republic ..., occasionally self-styled as Czechia ..." would be appropriate lede phrasing, as here or here. Doremo (talk) 03:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Why is this such an ENORMOUS problem just in the English language? There are endless discussions here, and even an article of its own just concerning the name of the country. In most other countries/languages this country is handled like most others in the world. One formal name (long form) for diplomatic and governmental use and one informal name (short form) used in most other cases. To use the name "Czechia" has nothing to with changing the name of the country. The key question is: Why differ English-language media from most others when it comes to the name of this country? --Muniswede (talk) 20:56, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
It's very simple. Mainstream English sources are not in the habit of using this term so it makes no sense for us to use it. Also, it seems rather rude on the part of the Czechia boosters to insist that another language MUST do things their way. It is as ridiculous as it would be for me to try to force the Czech language to use the word "blue" instead of its own, native, word for that color. --Khajidha (talk) 22:39, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Most coutries are normally called by its short name. The only exceptions are Central African Republic (why really not just "Central Africa", like "South Africa"?) In the case of Dominican Republic it could be mixed up with Dominica (maybe a good reason), the UEA (problematic). But this one? There is de facto a short form, but "mainstrem media" refuses to use it. Increadible! --Muniswede (talk) 12:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
It's just another one of the many, many, many irregularities of the English language. What I don't understand is why the Czechs (or yourself) even care what English calls their country? I have no clue what my country is called in Czech, Swedish, or virtually any other language. In fact I have no desire to know as it is completely irrelevant to me. As long as another language doesn't use a word that would be offensive in and of itself in that language, why would anyone be upset about the name that it uses? --Khajidha (talk) 12:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Post script about "Central Africa": In English "Central Africa" means "the center part of Africa". The parallel terminology is "Southern Africa", as opposed to "South Africa". For whatever reason in the English language things like "South Korea" and "South Carolina" can be used as distinct polities as opposed to directionally determined regions. However, "Center Africa" would not be allowed. --Khajidha (talk) 15:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
The reason media refused to use it was because the republic itself discouraged its use. Now it's not so anymore. Czechia is the common name of the country. /Hum Hum — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hum Hum (talk • contribs) 10:45, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Media is getting used to the name Czechia: http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21697158-government-prefers-english-version-name-reminded-vaclav-havel-crawling /Hum Hum

20160705 UN

published updated name Czechia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.59.74.167 (talk) 17:36, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

The UN homepage still uses the name Czech Republic, see here. /Hum Hum (talk) 11:35, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Now known as Czechia

The country is now known as Czechia, even if this was not always so.About the nameCNNBBCNPRThe Atlantic, about how it was before — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.131.61.38 (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

At least usually, commonly. /Hum Hum — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hum Hum (talk • contribs) 10:46, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Show me a mainstream English media source actually using it and not just commenting on it/explaining it. --Khajidha (talk) 12:20, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
CNN, BBC, The Atlantic all did nice stories in April about how the country wanted to be called Czechia, then pretty much immediately went back to calling it the Czech Republic - I looked at the search histories for all three sources.--Mojo Hand (talk) 20:55, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Funny how things can be. Funny how seemingly irrational journalist can describe things. One might have thought those articlew would have been the starting point for these news sources to change their own way of writing the country's name. I thought it was. /Hum Hum 09:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hum Hum (talk • contribs)
The starting point for a change in English language usage is for the country in question to start using the name in its English communications. Change the name plate at the UN, field sports teams under the new short form (I THINK this is starting), make press releases about events in the country (something like "Czechia seeks bids for construction of new railways"). Don't TELL us to change, SHOW us the change. --Khajidha (talk) 11:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but newspapers and news sites often take their own policy decissions on things like this. /Hum Hum 07:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Khajidha's comments on this topic here and elsewhere are correct. Proponents of the name Czechia should review WP:CRYSTALBALL, WP:ADVOCACY, WP:COMMONNAME, and other guidelines. If usage patterns change in the future, then future changes in WP will be appropriate. Doremo (talk) 11:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
I think the current status of lead is good and we should stick to that. Itsyoungrapper (talk) 15:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
The current lede ("also known as Czechia") is currently misleading for the reasons discussed above. Doremo (talk) 15:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
There is no really short way to describe the situation in the lead. The other option is to remove "Czechia" from the lead entirely, returning to the previous set up where it is only mentioned in the Name (or is it Etymology?) section. --Khajidha (talk) 15:25, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
This reminds me of the "Kazakstan" issue (see here). Despite the Kazakh government's 1995 decision, the h-less spelling never gained currency in English and is not even mentioned in the Kazakhstan article (although it should probably be noted in the Name/Etymology section). Doremo (talk) 15:31, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't recall ever even hearing about this idea. I am STILL confused as to why non-English speaking countries try to determine the English language form of their names. --Khajidha (talk) 15:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. English usage is not determined by academies (like French or Spanish are), let alone by nonce decisions by foreign governments. Doremo (talk) 15:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm just gonna point out that Czechia issue in the lead was already discussed on this talkpage here and consensus was met and I see no reason to discuss it again since it is from April of this year. Itsyoungrapper (talk) 21:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Almost everyone agrees that it should be mentioned in the lead, though the exact wording is up for debate. It's an unusual situation, and I don't know of any real precedent. The lead sentence is already long, so I'm leaning towards keeping it simple and sticking with "also known as".--Mojo Hand (talk) 22:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
But until this spring, the use of the name Czechia was discouraged from by the regime of said land. What happened this spring, was just that the regime decided to lift that discouragement and letting English speaking people say Czechia if they want to even in official circumstances. So Czechia did try to decide over this usage in English, but don't do it anymore. /Hum Hum 07:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
English speakers have no interest in (or even awareness of) the Czech government's opinion on how English should be used. It's no more relevant than if Washington issued a decree on how Czechs should use Czech. Doremo (talk) 11:54, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

for some reason wikipedians don't like the word "Czechia". 97.127.101.92 (talk) 20:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Have you bothered to read any of the comments on this page? Wikipedia doesn't care if the country calls itself Czechia, the Czech Republic or even Czechistan. Our only issue is what name the English-speaking world (primarily the media) uses for the country. If the English-speaking world calls it Czechia, so will we; if the English-speaking world calls it Czechistan, so will we.--Mojo Hand (talk) 21:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

can you tell me why my edit on the dominican republic article was change twice? I pointed out that Czechia adopted a short form name it got changed back twice 97.127.101.92 (talk) 21:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I didn't make the change, but I suspect its for the same reason that this article name hasn't been changed. The "Czech Republic" is currently the common name for the country in the English-speaking world, the Czech governments preference notwithstanding.--Mojo Hand (talk) 21:51, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Also, the web site they use as support for that statement doesn't use Czechia. The site doesn't actually count up the countries with names like that, it seems like the whole sentence could be removed as original research. --Khajidha (talk) 22:03, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
I was on the verge of removing it myself, so well done. It's not only OR, it's poor OR. If United Arab Emirates is included, why not United Kingdom and United States?  — Amakuru (talk) 22:17, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Also known as Czechia

What will it take to change the name of this article? "Also known as Czechia" is quite alright for the time being, but how long will it take for a potential change to come through so that everyone here is OK with a change of the article title? The 2016 Summer Olympics is comming up, I for one will try to look out to see if the Czech team calls itself Czechia at the opening ceremony on 5 August, where the countries always carry their flag and a name plaque. /Hum Hum 07:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hum Hum (talk • contribs)

It will take English speakers and writers actually using the name Czechia more than Czech Republic, that's all. In the meantime, it looks like this. Doremo (talk) 08:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
That's interesting. Thanks! When changing to a date closer to now, the lines look slightly different: 1980-2008. It looks like you can't set a date later than 2008. /Hum Hum 11:28, 27 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hum Hum (talk • contribs)
It takes a consensus of Wikipedia editors in a move discussion. In the last move discussion, the name change failed to achieve consensus with many contributors concerned that Czechia was not yet the common name for the country in English. Convincing people that the new name has become the common name would usually requires evidence of actual use in English language sources. The most convincing evidence is often statistical comparisons of a form that allow one to compare how often "Czechia" is being used relative to "Czech Republic". For perspective, Wikipedia recently moved "Burma" to Myanmar about 15 years after the (controversial) ruling government declared that "Myanmar" was now the official name of the country. Sometimes these things can take a while, though I doubt Czechia will be as controversial as Myanmar. In that case whole articles were written about the geopolitics and history of the Myanmar naming dispute. Dragons flight (talk) 22:35, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but in the matter of Burma vs Myanmar, the name change was made by a government which internationally was considered illegal and Burma is still today probably more used than Myanmar as a name anyway, so I don't know if that's a good comparission. Hum Hum (talk) 08:51, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Actually, the consensus was that Myanmar is now more common, hence the name change. Dragons flight (talk) 09:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
I suppose it depends which data one looks at, but it's a good comparison. "Myanmar" obviously has a decent claim to statistical legitimacy, whereas "Czechia" is still a flatliner. Doremo (talk) 10:13, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
How long, so everyone here is OK with a change of the article title? Even many Czechs find single word name for their (our) country controversial...Pavlor (talk) 09:04, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
There might be a change eventually, if this new name really takes off in reliable English sources, but we're really a very long way from that. As already said, we stuck with Burma for years because that was still the common name, but finally it became clear that English RS really had moved to Myanmar.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:10, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Current text "also known as Czechia" is OK (for now) no renaming needed. Measuring of English usage will be interesting or how to do it (occurences in last year? Ten years...?) but now it is not the time. I don't believe Czechia will be seen anywhere in Olympics, change was too recent and it hasn't been promoted at all. On the other hand CIA noticed :The World Factbook :) and so did [US Departement of State]. CZechia may not be the first option to pick, Czech Republic wins, but Czechia has its place in the article as official short version. Chrzwzcz (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Use of the short form in the article

Given all the talk above, is it appropriate for the short term to be used except in the lead and etymology sections? I think there about five other examples in the article. Farleysmaster (talk) 22:29, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I've cleaned up the inappropriate usages. Doremo (talk) 03:09, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 August 2016


"srtistic" should be "artistic"

"wthout" should be "without"

(both in the "Film" section)


Choroba (talk) 09:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

 Done  — Amakuru (talk) 09:51, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Media about the possible future of Czechia's name

http://www.radio.cz/en/section/one-on-one/bureaucrats-holding-czechia-back-but-name-will-catch-on-says-professor-petr-pavlinek

>>The government began taking fresh steps to promote the use of “Czechia” in April this year. How do you view the progress since then regarding the use of “Czechia”?

“There has been important progress. First of all, on May 2 the government formally approved ‘Czechia’ as the short name, the geographic name for the Czech Republic.

“Then the United Nations was officially notified by the Czech government about the use of the short name.

“And on July 5 it was included in the official UN database of geographic names as the short name for the Czech Republic.”

But is it being used more? I’m not talking about formal steps, I’m asking about the actual usage of “Czechia”.

“Actually, it has been used more by others than by the Czechs.

“For example, the American State Department now has ‘Czechia’ on its website.

“Also the influential CIA World Factbook included ‘Czechia’.

“But the Czechs themselves have been hesitant to use it. They are making a number of excuses as to why not to use it.<<

Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 02:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Czech Republic. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 17:27, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Czechia, once more, again

According to this article in The Independent, and UK government document, the Permanent Committee on Geographical Names is recommending standardising on Czechia. Scarabocchio (talk) 12:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Wait and see if this has any affect on general usage. So far the articles I am seeing are mostly (as in the VAST majority) specifically arguing for or against the use of Czechia or are from the English language press of a non-English speaking country (ie Ukraine Today) or are exceedingly minor sources (Carbon Pulse is not likely to have much affect on general usage). --Khajidha (talk) 12:44, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
True. The Czech Embassy in London [5] and the London Czech Centre [6] are both using 'Czech Republic'. Scarabocchio (talk) 13:07, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Agreeing with Khajidha: it's only worth a footnote until this changes. Doremo (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Uhm, Doremo, you forgot several things. First of all, the graph doesn't go further than 2008, meaning it's automatically outdated. Second of all, you didn't use the right syntax. See here (it needs quotation marks). Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 17:40, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Your syntax returns an error when you click on the link and it contains "year_end=2008". Doremo (talk) 17:47, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Synthesizing some of my previous comments on this: I do NOT see news stories with actual bylines in Czechia. There are no "President of Czechia announces....", "Economy of Czechia experiences....", "Take your next vacation in Czechia", etc type stories. The word is not being used, it is being explained and lobbied for. Don't TELL us to change, SHOW us the change. --Khajidha (talk) 14:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Old post moved from incorrect placement

Czech Republic Transport in the Czech Republic." Czech Republic. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016. AlexisElena (talk) 17:16, 10 October 2016 (UTC)AlexisElena

Motto

The motto "Pravda vítězí" (veritas vincit, truth prevails) is on the presidential flag. Isn't it rather a presidential motto than the national motto? Is there any relevant source which mentioned it as an official national motto? Yes, it has some pattern in Hussite motto "Veritas Dei vincit", is sometimes cited on Czech WWI memorials etc., but not officialy declared as national (state) motto IMHO. --ŠJů (talk) 12:33, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, as I understand it, it is the motto of the office of the president, not the motto of the country. Hum Hum (talk) 10:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Abbreviations listed in lede (CR)

It should be noted that CR is the official abbreviation of Costa Rica, only CZ is correct. The source cited is questionable. The CR abbreviation listed is only used in Czech, with a caron, not in English. This may cause quite a bit of confusion...perhaps the abbreviation information should be moved somewhere else and a special note included? What is the point of including it in the lede? The lede was already long before, now it's just ridiculous. A Nebraska Cornhusker (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. CR is the official abbreviation of Costa Rica not the Czech Republic. CZ should not be listed BEFORE the short name Czechia, which is now included in the official UN databases of country names: UNTERM and UNGEGN (http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/geonames/ and https://unterm.un.org/UNTERM/search?urlQuery=CZECHIA). This edit needs to be removed or at least moved in the case of CZ. The lede was already too long. Also CZE is used as the abbreviation for the country. The lede should be protected against this kind of arbitrary changes. Does Wikipedia normally list official abbreviations of other countries in their ledes and before their short names? Of course not.Geog25 (talk) 20:20, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
I deleted the abbreviation from the lead because I don't think it somehow helps and makes the article better, in Wikipedia article on Germany, for example you also don't have an abbreviation GER. Itsyoungrapper (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
We should not confuse international codes of countries with abbrevations of states, even though they can be similar or identic. For example, CS was a stable abbrevation of Czechoslovakia, but CSR or CSSR or CSFR abbrevations of the specific Czechoslovak states. Beside it, the international code is not necessarily a usual abbreviation. E.g. the code of Ukraine is UA (because UK is "usurped" by the United Kingdom, the origin of the "A" is disputable - in the Czech context, UK is also sometimes interpreted as Ukraine, "úkáčko" is a common slang name for Ukraine people). CZ is used as an apolitical code for the country, while CR is a specific abbrevations of the current state regime and a literal translation of the official Czech abbrevation ČR. Of course, the unambiguous code should be preferred, but the alternative abbrevation can be also mentioned. If Czechia (Czech 2+1/10 lands) would change back to the monarchy (or to anarchy or to declared dictature or protectorate), it can remain CZ (Czechia) but not CR (Czech Republic). --ŠJů (talk) 12:54, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Abbreviations and letter codes for countries are different in different circumstances. There is no need for a note about an abbreviation in the lede to this article, unless it is commonly used even in speech. Hum Hum (talk) 10:05, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe

It was decided to move discussion from List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe here. So: column English short and formal names [19][20][21] where links are official documents with Czechia present, why it is not allowed to include Czechia in this column. Answer(?): Column name says English short and formal names but in fact it means English common (not necessarily official) and official formal names, as proven by names like "United Kingdom", or (in similar articles) "United States", "North Korea", which are not at all official (UN, ISO), but damn common. Therefore there's no place for Czechia, it is neither common short nor official formal long. But why it has to be twice repeated "Czech Republic" (once with the "the") and why a note "Czechia is official short" and link to "Name of Czech Republic" is not allowed...? IMHO it makes no difference, it won't help Czechia a bit if Czechia is included in that article (at least as a note), but also it is not promoting, why trying to eliminate it when it kind of is article about country names from official documents and common names. Chrzwzcz (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I would list Czechia, but with a footnote that it is rare and may not be understood/may be misunderstood. --Khajidha (talk) 18:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Twice Czech Republic - no other state has twice the same line. Yeah, I added small note "A simpler official short-form name has been encouraged by the Czech government: the English variant Czechia remains uncommon, but variants in Czech (Česko) and some other languages are more popular. See Name of the Czech Republic." which was copied from similar article. It may need some update (not only government idea, now official) but was deleted. Chrzwzcz (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

The point was not that the discussion of what goes on that article should take place here. That's outside all Wikipedia norms. It was that that article - and every other article that refers to the the Czech Republic or any other country on the list - should be using the name of the article as its primary reference to the state in question. That way, we avoid having the exact same discussion with the exact same arguments separately on thousands and thousands of different articles individually. There will be exceptions per WP:COMMONSENSE and project consensus, but neither applies here.

The contents of the article List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe are decided at Talk:List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe. The decision made there was not to move the discussion here, it was that we should use the title of this article to refer to the state. If consensus here is to move this article is "Czechia", then that article - and the vast majority of other articles - should change to use "Czechia". But while this article is entitled "Czech Republic", we should also refer to the "Czech Republic" as the standard English name of this country. Kahastok talk 20:30, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

OK, consider this as an invitation then. "article that refers to the the Czech Republic or any other country on the list - should be using the name of the article as its primary reference to the state in question" - it is a little bit strict to use only one of possible names and unify all occurrences on one term, but OK. But you can't really rename things that do have "Czechia" in their name or rewrite cited documentation to contain the one and only unifying term. Chrzwzcz (talk) 21:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
You're overcomplicating this.
Obviously, if an organisation has a WP:COMMONNAME that includes the word "Czechia" then we'll use the correct name of the organisation. Obviously if we're taking a direct quote from a source we'll respect the quote (though there is no need not to apply our own standards to our own writing). We don't jettison common sense.
But it would be totally crazy to insist on having exactly the same discussion over and over and over again on article after article after article after article after article after article after article and thousands more, when the arguments are identical in each case because there's no reason why it should be different on this article to what it was on that one. That's the alternative. And it's not like this is a novelty. It works perfectly well with the vast majority of other articles. There's no reason it can't work with this one. Kahastok talk 21:39, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Either it is the same discussion as before and it was correct to jump with discussion here, or "List of" is an exception to be discussed there. I don't want a discussion about common name, it is solved over and over again. I accept that in vast majority of articles "Czech Republic" will be the used as first choice. (IMHO on this page there is an agreement that) mention about "Czechia" is totally acceptable (or welcomed maybe?) in articles where the name of the country is discussed. "List of sovereign..." looks like the kind of article (names names names), it does have a few notes about other countries and their specialties, it roughly looks like copy of official UN database table, so Czechia can be included as small (meaningless) note :) Is it important to include it? Not really. Is it necessary to delete it then? IMHO no reason. Chrzwzcz (talk) 21:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
I support a move to Czechia. Others have noted good reasons. Frenchmalawi (talk) 15:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Me too. The risk of being misunderstood is miniscule. Hum Hum (talk) 10:00, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
You must have read arguments I haven't seen, then. All I've seen are variations of 1) it's official and 2) it's like other countries. Neither of which are relevant. All that matters is common English usage. About the only time I see the word Czechia used in English is when someone is arguing that it should be used in English. --Khajidha (talk) 11:18, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 21 October 2016

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: Not moved per WP:SNOW. No indication of this talk discussion resulting in anything except "not moved". (non-admin closure). Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:39, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Czech Republic → Czechia – Natural, common name, concise. Foreign governments, such as Cia of America, have begun using the name. If it weren't clear enough. "Czechia: English speakers told to use new name for Czech Republic." Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 01:11, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

  • Strong oppose. If it weren't clear enough, one could read the talk archives, more than half of which consist of reasons not to make this move. A one-line, no-content move rationale with one source shouldn't even be a reason to avoid speedily closing this move request, never mind actually supporting a move. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 01:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC) N.B. I graciously acknowledge that this was changed to a two-line rationale with two sources after I posted the preceding. It is still no reason to move the article. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 02:20, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose move. Six months later, the status quo from the last RM has not changed. The common name in English, at this moment, is still Czech Republic.  ONR  (talk)  02:27, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose for reasons stated above. Doremo (talk) 02:40, 21 October 2016 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Czech Republic. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 09:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Please change

Please replace "also known by the short name Czechia" with "also listed in UN database by the short name Czechia". Czechia is not commonly accepted name, it was only listed in UN database by present Czech government. See [7]. 194.228.13.232 (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

It may not be commonly accepted name but as you mentioned, it is listed in the UN database that means people can found it and know it by that name. There's consensus it will be mentioned in the lede and we have already discussed this many many times. Itsyoungrapper (talk) 21:26, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit war

Please stop edit war over the glass picture. I think that there is currently enough of pictures in that section, so there is no need for new picture. If yes, there are better examples at commons:Category:Bohemian glass, as proposed picture is more likely applied arts and only average quality.--Jklamo (talk) 13:59, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I agree. The picture doesn't show that glass very well at all. It should not be included. Ground Zero | t 16:08, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
The same from me. Please stop Concus Cretus and Jirka.h23. I also agree that the image is not very nice. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 16:46, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, that picture is pretty poor: uneven lighting, mixed backgrounds--Khajidha (talk) 17:50, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
What picture do you mean from commons:Category:Bohemian glass? Concus Cretus firstly argued that this is anonymous modern art (it is not: it is Bohemia Crystal), then low quality image (it is not: sharp image with 2,184×2,298 is used here normally), then out-of-scope-of-this-article (it is not: it is just illustration to the text which was here for years). Concus Cretus thinks that just he have patent for posting any picture related to Czech Republic (and not only in this article). I would agree with Khajidha, that lighting and mixed backgrounds is not not just excellent (what Concus Cretus was not argued). I would understand if he would fought over any better image, however he is arogantly deleting it. Jirka.h23 (talk) 06:44, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Picture was changed.Jirka.h23 (talk) 08:30, 7 January 2017 (UTC)


Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2016


Czech Republic should be primarily known as 'Czechia', according to Government advisors on the proper naming of geographical places and features outside the UK. The Permanent Committee on Geographical Names (PCGN) advised all english to start using the new term. Czechia leaders released a statement saying “it is recommended to use a one-word name in foreign languages if it is not necessary to use the formal name of the country”. One does not use 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' as the full name for the 'United Kingdom', so the naming convention of 'Czechia' should also be observed and respected.

193.55.52.1 (talk) 04:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

The fact remains that Czechia is very uncommon in English, IF that changes we will change. Until then, no. --Khajidha (talk) 04:18, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm not so sure about that. See page 15 of The European Culture Area: A Systematic Geography (2008): "Increasingly one hears the short form Czechia. Even though that name is not as widely known as other truncations (e.g., Slovakia for the Slovak Republic), we have decided to use Czechia for consistency and to reflect its growing use in the country itself." Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 17:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
How is usage in the country itself relevant to usage in the Anglophone world? --Khajidha (talk) 19:09, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

It is so uncommon that Google maps is using it. Helveticus96 (talk) 07:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

If the "Anglophone world" should be represented by some hypothetic not very educated farmer (or journalist) somewhere (nothing against him, nobody can be omniscient!), who didn't noticed dissolution of Czechoslovakia and never did know their parts, then we can suppose wrongly that the "Anglophone world" is a bit delayed towards reality. Should be Wikipedia also? When I see edit wars about Czech Republic (disambiguation), which tenaciously mentions several randomly selected eras of Czechoslovak Republic as "other meanings" of the Czech Republic, I have a suspicion that Wikipedia is intended for dyslectics or ignorants who are able to confuse Czechia with Chechnya, Slovakia with Slovenia, Latvia with Lietuva and Austria with Australia, and always ignored geographical name of Czechia, known and used from the 17th century when nobody supposed the future republicanism or specific republics. Wikipedia should be not a promoter of unsuccessful ideas, but also not a flywheel which should support ignorant people in their obtuseness, backwardness and lack of education. Wikipedia should bring accurate and updated information to the reader who can not know them yet. It's a dilemma. Should be prevalent "common use" (or even "common ignorance") preferred over official, authoritative or updated sources? How much? --ŠJů (talk) 13:35, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
I find it ironic that you are attempting to lecture as to proper English usage......--Khajidha (talk) 14:36, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm not very good at English but I'm quite sure that Czechoslovakia is not a meaning of the words "Czech Republic". The described dilemma is not just about English usage but about the role of Wikipedia generally. What should be preferred – the more correct (or the more consistent), or the more common? We need balance it. Of course, the common usage is always belated toward the current reality. --ŠJů (talk) 01:18, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Khajidha, I don't see how can mockery of knowledge of English be argument in: Why "Czech Republic (disambiguation)" contains links and terms which do not contain exact phrase "Czech Republic" in their article name. ŠJů apparently thinks that the disambiguation may contain only pages "Czech Republic (****)", not some randomly chosen articles "Czech****Republic****" (like Czechoslovak Socialist Republic). The argument can be "It does not matter, the disambiguation page can contain any links which may sound similar or are historically connected."
Czechia - it is OK that Wikipedia uses "Czech Republic" as "common name". But it should not be silenced that "Czechia" is official short name as proven by UN, CIA and ISO sources. Wikipedia cannot choose to ignore that fact in articles describing the name(s) of the country (and now it does not ignore but it was a struggle), in other articles it is understandable to use "common name". Chrzwzcz (talk) 08:04, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Read this article's lede and the full article dedicated to this topic. Nobody has "silenced" anything. Doremo (talk) 08:47, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
As I wrote: now it does not ignore but it was a struggle. Chrzwzcz (talk) 08:55, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Response to comment to me: I made such arguments several times in the edit summaries when I reverted ŠJů's changes. My point is that if you are going to make the judgement that the common English language usage is "wrong", you need to make sure that your own English usage is as right as possible.
Response to comment about Czechia: As long as I've been coming to this page it has included information about Czechia being a (little-used) short form name for the Czech Republic. This has never been denied or hidden. No, it was not formerly mentioned in the lead for the simple reason that the usage of the word in English is extremely rare. Misspellings were shown to have greater usage in ngrams previously provided. Calling attention to this word in the lead was therefore not reasonable. The recent pronouncements by the Czech government have given it enough currency to be mentioned in the lead, but it is still rare to see actual usage in English texts. Compare the number of "Czechia experiences record economic growth" type articles to the number of articles that basically say "You can use Czechia now, guys". It is still being lobbied for and explained much more than it is being used. --Khajidha (talk) 12:55, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Well it is included in official databases, so the lead should contain both official names short and long. Other countries are in the opposite situation - official long names are rarely known and used, but they do have their place in the lead nevertheless. I do agree that Czechia is now used mainly in news about the "renaming". But was it really expected that "new" word would be used all of a sudden, yesterday 0 %, tomorrow 100 %?! Did you think that in three months period you'd hear only about Czechia, no more Czech Republic? It takes time for huge country, it takes more time for a small country which is not in the news every day, and it takes ages for a small country which does not do anything for new name promotion (anything visible... yet, you know to make new manuals, promo materials, jerseys, blahblahblah :)). I agree that Czech Republic must identify as Czechia if it wants to be called that way. Chrzwzcz (talk) 13:44, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Why haven't they changed their nameplate at the UN? Surely that could have been done at the same time that they registered the short name with various UN agencies. I actually expected exactly the result we've gotten: no change. Most of the news agencies that reported on this have failed to follow through in their own usage, so why would anyone else change? --Khajidha (talk) 14:18, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Most of the agencies only reported the bombastic message "country will rename itself". Then it was clear it is not the case and they are waiting for country to do something, because both names are correct long and short and they are not really forced to change anything. Permanent Committee on Geographical Names (PCGN) advised all Britons to start using the new term, maybe UK will fight it for Czechia (or is it Czech diplomatic success)? Maybe DB entry is preliminary move, I agree that it could go faster, but it is politics and it is slooooooow. I don't know anything about UN nameplates, if they have to be the same as short name in UN DB, how often do they make them, if country must ask for them, or if it is such a deal. Idea was to promote it mostly through sport because it makes most positive news about CZ. Chrzwzcz (talk) 15:37, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

the Battle of White Mountain

I think there must be a mention about the Battle of White Mountain, because it was one of the most important battles in the history of the lands of the Bohemian Crown. It was a decisive moment for the next centuries... so yes, it surely must be there. Herbertík (talk) 19:25, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

It is already mentioned in the history section. --Jklamo (talk) 00:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Move to Czechia

I propose to move the article to Czechia and use the Czech Republic as a redirect. Czechia has announced that it wants English speakers to refer to it with the Czechia name and not the Czech Republic name. Every country has the right to be known by the name it chooses. Eleni Kaltsi (talk) 07:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Oppose for now. Wikipedia uses WP:COMMONNAMEs for articles, not official names, as had been pointed out to the proper on several occasions. Proposals for changing an article name should be supported with reference to Wikipedia policies, as I have pointed out to the proposer. Evidence to support the proposal should include evidence that the proposed name has emerged into common use. It may some day, but evidence proceed in previous discussions supports the argument that "Czech Republic" continues to be the common name in English. Ground Zero | t 13:13, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
    • czechia is already in use, it is the direct translation of the name, it is the correct name, your behaviour makes wikipedia wrong, wikipedia should state the correct name which is czechia. Eleni Kaltsi (talk) 15:10, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
      • If you can show that Czechia is now the commonly used name in English, please do so. That would help your argument, and I would be willing to change my position. Ground Zero | t 15:28, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
      • Point by point
      • 1) "Czechia is already in use" - yes, but not widespread
      • 2) "it is the direct translation of the name" - irrelevant
      • 3) "it is the correct name" - by whose standards? This is the English language wiki, the decrees of the Czech government are irrelevant to English usage.
      • 4) "your behaviour makes Wikipedia wrong" - How can following English language usage on an English language site be wrong?
      • 5) "Wikipedia should state the correct name, which is Czechia" - aside from the previously stated objection to the word "correct", we already state that this form exists and is recommended by the Czech government.
      • If English usage changes, we will change; but not before. --Khajidha (talk) 15:29, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Small steps - Google maps uses "Czechia" for places/points, like "Directions from here" "Directions to here" and "What's here" - I hope this example link works generally. It is not used in "world map", nevertheless slow progress is there :) Chrzwzcz (talk) 17:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, there is progress being made in its usage. It is still a long way to go, but it seems possible that the change may be made by the end of this year. But no promises, momentum could die off again. --Khajidha (talk) 21:49, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd love to bring similar news in usage each month to confirm momentum. Chrzwzcz (talk) 23:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Update:
  • Used now on Google maps.
  • Used in all Google applications (i.e. any drop down boxes etc which are used across the internet by thousands if not hundreds of thousands sites.
  • Listed in the United Nations´ databases “UNTERM” and “UNGEGN” as the official short name of the Czech Republic.
  • Listed as the short name by ISO 3166 standard published by the International Organization for Standardization.
  • Listed on CIA fact book.
  • Will be used in sports moving forward in the English language.
  • And Technological comitee made this statement:----> The decision about the name “Czechia” has been made by those who are qualified by the law to make it. November 2014 statement of the Terminological Committee of the Czech Office for Surveying, Mapping and Cadaster states: “According to the article 3 of Act 1994/200 on Land Surveying, the standardization of names of settlement and non-settlement units is a land surveying activity in public interest and its results and recommendations should be followed by national and local state institutions. The position of the Terminological Committee of the Czech Office for Surveying, Mapping and Cadaster, an advisory authority of the Czech Office for Surveying, Mapping and Cadaster for the codification of country names, on the use of the name Česko and its foreign language variants (Czechia, Tschechien, Tchéquie, Chequia…) is positive. This position on the use of the one-word name Česko and its equivalents in foreign languages has not changed since 1993. The experts unequivocally recommended the use of “Czechia” in English and its variants in other language (Tschechien, Tchéquie, Chequia etc.). This is not an opinion but the outcome of the process of standardization.”
  • Wikipedia should be updated, stay with the times, follow standards, be accurate and take part in educating. I think now is the time to make the change.X243m3 (talk) 08:18, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Intro

Anybody else think the lead has gotten WAY too long and overly detailed.--Khajidha (talk) 13:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I am not a friend of long leads but in comparison with lead of GA United States the length is approximately equal.--Jklamo (talk) 09:40, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Khajidha, I'd only like to point out to the very first sentence: The Czech Republic, also known by the short name Czechia. Wouldn't it be useful to abridge it a bit by omitting the words also known or to rephrase the sentence to simplify it? Personally, I don't really think it's necessary to state it in this form. I would write The Czech Republic (phonetics) or Czechia in a short form (phonetics). What's your opinion? Oasis98 (talk) 20:27, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Or, The Czech Republic (phonetics) or Czechia (phonetics). I don't think that we need to spell out that "Czechia" is shorter than "Czech Republic". Our readers are pretty smart. Ground Zero | t 20:44, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Maybe, some information can be omitted and some should be added, but the extent of the intro is adequate, as said above by Jklamo. If the article should be not only about the present republic but also about the country itself, a short summary of its previous forms and statuses is necessary. I noticed even an attempt to remove the information about the date of creation of the Czech Republic (1969, within the federation). Such basic information should be surely not absent in the intro. Regrettably, now is missing. The article is about the Czech Republic and somebody deleted the year of the creation of the republic from the intro of the article. Isn't it absurd?

Regrettably, some edits are made by uneducated people who consider "Czechoslovakia" as other meaning of the term "Czech Republic", even though Czech Republic is only one subject in the history and its name has no other meaning. We should not omit to inform such people that the only Czech Republic was created in 1969 (under the original name Czech Socialistic Republic) and there is no other Czech Republic in the whole world. --ŠJů (talk) 19:00, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

switch article to European English orthography

Czechia teaches European English orthography (labour, travelled, realise, defence) to its students in the public school system. People of Czechia use European English orthography, not American English orthography (labor, traveled, realize, defense). therefore we must switch the article to European English orthography. I propose to do this. Eleni Kaltsi (talk) 07:47, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

A non-starter per MOS:ENGVAR. Doremo (talk) 07:50, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
my proposal is in line with this wikipedias policy, czechia is a european state and therefore it must use european english, not americano Eleni Kaltsi (talk) 15:09, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
That is irrelevant to the policy. The relevant guideline states that articles should maintain the version of English they are started with, unless there are significant, direct national ties to another variant. As the usage of English in the Czech Republic is only as a secondary/foreign language it has no significant, direct national ties to any variant of English.--Khajidha (talk) 15:33, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't agree with this; generally European topics usually default to British English, per WP:TIES. It's a closer match. Just as topics across the Americas usually default to American English. The case for WP:RETAIN is weaker for a regional article, which has closer ties to the UK than the US, than it would be for any other miscellaneous topic such as French press or Yogurt.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:14, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
A closer match to what? The Czech Republic is not a former British colony, a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, or anything else that suggests MOS:TIES. Doremo (talk) 17:32, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
They are both members of the EU and British spelling is usually used in the official documents from EU. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.240.10 (talk) 10:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
A non-starter per MOS:ENGVAR. Doremo (talk) 10:21, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

other page that needs to be "corrected"

No, because most of the history is from before the present state was founded and as far as I know, the terms are not exactly interchangable. Hum Hum (talk) 09:59, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
It should be moved to History of Czechia. Frenchmalawi (talk) 17:26, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
It will be moved to History of Czechia if you can show that Czechia is actually commonly used and not just lobbied for. --Khajidha (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
That doesn't make sense to me. As has been said. Czech Republic has been around all of only 23 years. The article question is not a history of its territory. It is much more than that. It is a history of the lands known as Czechia over generations. Frenchmalawi (talk) 13:08, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
And the United States has only existed since 1776, but the U.S. history course I took in high school covered events all the way back to the Bering ice bridge. --Khajidha (talk) 14:20, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
This historical parallel you have given show the dissimilarity. Do you bear in mind, how was the country, that existed here before the era of 'the Czech Republic' and Czechoslovakia called? Surprisingly, it was Czechia (Česko). You are absolutely right, that the USA did not exist before 1776. On the other hand, Czechia - a sovereign state of Czechs was here way before January 1, 1993, October 28, 1918 respectively. We are talking about a year 870, when the Czech Duchy (or Duchy of Bohemia) was formed. Oasis98 (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
But the point is that in English, people have been calling it "Czechia" only since last year, and even then, only a few people are using that name. The English websites of the Czech government and Czech tourism authority continue to use "Czech Republic". Ground Zero | t 18:18, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
As already explained in another section, Czech tourism agency MUST use "Czech Republic" in its program "Czech Republic - Land of Stories" or face the danger of returning about 1 billion CZK to EU which co-funded this program and it cannot change until 2020. Seems like nonsense bureaucracy but it is what it is. Another editor showed you that it is common for government sites of other countries to use formal name, so it is also false argument. And what does it matter anyway. If Czech government and tourist sites used Czechia, you would say the same thing anyway - "Czechia is not common in English" so no need to bring and repeat those false reasons. It is not common, sure. Sport is the easiest way how to gain recognition, not politics. But as I can tell you won't see quick (if any) actions of Czech sport organizations either. I think you won't find analogies, other countries actually renamed so they rushed with changes, but as you know Czech Republic case was not "renaming" but creating a "nickname". To sum up, keep the name "History of the Czech lands" as a compromise, it is very stupid to read about kings of 13th century Czech Republic. Chrzwzcz (talk) 19:58, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
'only a few people are using that name' By what measures did you come up with that? There're nearly 6 mil. results for Czechia on Google and the number is (understandably) increasing. You can read my previous post about formal name usage, that official governmental webpages use the formal name normally. 'Czech tourism authority continue to use "Czech Republic"' Chrzwzcz explains this topic reasonably. Last November, the same website released an article called 'Olympic Parks in Czechia' [8]. Czech President uses Czechia as well [9]. This is indeed a long-term process and the name Czechia, such as any other English word, won't become common in less than a year after its codification. Just give it some time. I'm not constraining any of you to change it. If I were in your position, I probably wouldn't act differently. I'm just trying to present you some reports: showing, that some of your arguments might not be righteous. Are we giving you the facts you refuse to hear? Oasis98 (talk) 22:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, a google search returns nearly 6 million pages containing the word "Czechia". However, most of the first several pages of results consists of articles that explain the name or lobby for its usage as opposed to actually using it. You can write as many articles as you would like that basically say "Hey, guys, it would be really neato if you called us Czechia", but they don't count as far as usage. Also, usage in English as a secondary language media is, by definition, secondary. So all the Czechia-using articles that I see from Belarus have only a very minor affect on English usage.--Khajidha (talk) 12:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I agree on that. Assimilation of the name "Czechia" in English will take some time, if its usage isn't forced. One of the crucial matters is a mention in an article of some global main stream media. Concerning politics, travel, culture or sport. I've noticed, that other world languages, such as Spanish, French, Arabic and even Chinese and Italian are way further than English is. Many of their nation's most read newspapers have already mentioned the short, geographical name in ordinary articles. French WP is in a process of serious discussion about a possible move to the short name. I know, that this truly doesn't matter here, but it's a quite interesting information. I'd like to post a link to a webpage in Czech, where (probably) most mentions of Czechia are gathered. The list is occasionally updated. [10] Oasis98 (talk) 20:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
I've actually seen an article from Australia and one from the US that use Czechia (as opposed to just discussing it), so it is gaining ground. I find it quite likely that the move will occur late this year or early next year.--Khajidha (talk) 12:08, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
One thing to keep in mind when comparing English to other languages is that many of those others (including all the ones you listed) are regulated languages, unlike English. --Khajidha (talk) 12:16, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Frankly, I'm not familiar with linguistics that much to fully understand how does a regulated language manifest. Would you be so kind to explain it to me? By the way, I've actually seen a mention of Czechia in The Financial and in The Huffington Post. Generally, many English sources write Czechia altogether with the political name. I guess that they're starting to realize, that the short name is more practical. Oasis98 (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Oasis98, English has neither national, nor international organisations deciding official usage or spelling or naming policies, which many European languages have (and which the people there often promptly ignore). That is why someone's comment further up (that the "Permanent Committee on Geographical Names' recommended that all Britons use 'Czechia'") is nonsense, the committee was simply recommending that Govt depts begin to use 'Czechia'. Why? Because the Czech Govt had asked them to. But English is ultimately regulated by those that use it, not by Govt and certainly not by WP. 'Czechia' is still a very long way from being the most commonly used name in English, which even the tourist board recognise. Cheer up though, Hellenic people have been trying to persuade the rest of the world that their country isn't actually called Greece for over 2000 years, the world might start to listen to them one day! Pincrete (talk) 00:26, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

google maps

Czechia https://www.google.com/maps/place/Czechia/@49.7170445,10.9886183,6z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x470b948fd7dd8243:0xf8661c75d3db586f!8m2!3d49.817492!4d15.472962 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.5.30 (talk) 16:56, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Google ČR spokeswoman said that name Czechia was inserted into geographic layer of Google maps on 19 January 2017. Google continues to insert it into all DBs and UIs where short name is usually used. Google follows decision of Czech foreign ministry which arranged insertion of Czechia into UN databases UNGEGN and UNTERM.
I guess (I know actually) it means nearly nothing for Wikipedia, it does not follow government orders or official databases but only common usage. Pretty huge step forward though. Chrzwzcz (talk) 15:02, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Against Google

Google is not the only or main source for Wikipedia. Google has its own rules (following official documentation), Wikipedia has its own principles (so called common name). It is nice to have some principles, but when competing with Google... I don't say "Google knows best", but are there another countries where Google (maps) says one thing and Wikipedia another? Such inconsistencies must be confusing for readers. Chrzwzcz (talk) 15:39, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Don't you think that inconsistency with the most common usage would be more confusing than inconsistency with whatever Google Maps is doing if the latter is not the most common usage? If anything, in that case, it's Google Maps that's creating the confusion. Largoplazo (talk) 15:49, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
New name be always less used and common than the previous one. Google wants to be current, Wikipedia keeps conservative approach. Chrzwzcz (talk) 16:11, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
East Timor and Ivory Coast. --Khajidha (talk) 15:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Czechia is in very exclusive company :) It is all or just examples? Chrzwzcz (talk)
If you disagree with Wikipedia's policy on using the most commonly used name, you are free to propose changes to it on that policy's talk page. But if other editors don't agree with your proposals, you won't be able to get your way by arguing endlessly about it. And if that policy doesn't change, it will be pointless to argue for a change to this article's title until common usage in English changes. Ground Zero | t 01:52, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Why would I want to change policy to add 1 new rule which would apply for "every country which suddenly introduced short official name and had none before". Rules should be short, cases which are unexpected should be discussed individually (and make precendent). I can see there's no will to treat this as exception case which never happened before (or happened, but this time it has different pro-renaming aspects to consider, Google on their side, etc.) and to say that policy doesn't give straight answer, other rules should be considered etc. Most of you say it is textbook case of common name. That's OK but it is OK to ask as here "Was there ever a case where Wikipedia went against Google (or other important sources)? There was and is quite common? OK, good to know, this will not help our 'cause' :)". Chrzwzcz (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

'Nobody calls it Czechia'

Here's an interesting article from a WP:RS on the failure of the name "Czechia" to enter popular usage, and its unpopularity even within the Czech Republic:

Tait, Robert (25 October 2016). "'Nobody calls it Czechia': Czech Republic's new name fails to catch on". The Guardian. Retrieved 2016-10-26.

-- The Anome (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

This reminds me of the failed name change of "Kazakhstan" to "Kazakstan" (here and here). That, the failure of Czechia, and other failures (like Estonia to Estland; here) could be a basis for an article on county name failures. Doremo (talk) 09:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
No wonder that it's unpopolar in Czechia. After all, a lot of people here really hate the term "Česko". --Silesianus (talk) 10:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Count me in, among "haters". I also have to laugh at the argument in the discussion that people here surely want this country to be called "Czechia" because the government agreed on it and the government represents people of the country. Just go make a poll how many people do agree with rising taxes, for example, and you'll see how the government represents wishes of the people ... There is relatively small group of people who push hard for Česko/Czechia use (I wonder about the reasons, Cui bono?), and they try to make it seem that everyone wants that. Try a simple googlefight "v česku", "v české republice" and "v čechách" (use the quotes otherwise Google will do substitution!) - right now, I'm getting 12.6, 13.3 and 4.8 millions. (Note that except "v ... republice", there are some additional hits because it may also mean just the western part of the republic.) (Also note that I'm using locative case on purpose, to demonstrate usage and not just formal name occurences.) So "Česko" is not winning, yet the group was aggressive enough to push "Česko" onto Czech Wiki a few years ago, when it would loose the fight by difference of order or maybe two, and since then, the Wiki usage contributes to Google hits ... Also note that if you search without history (so that Google doesn't personalize the results), hits for "v česku" are 90% news articles, while for "v české republice" there is mix - common usage by ordinary people. --83.240.62.72 (talk) 23:49, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Already discussed million times so briefly: Name of a country is a brand. It can be new word, but it should represent long and glorious history and tradition. It is kind of sad Czechs selected Czech Republic, which they consider to be the festive glorious name, but is only represents 24 years of 1000-year history. Small public demand only is nothing to be proud of, it only shows lack of national confidence, no interest in history and tradition. And to use the word republic, look who's using it for its promotion in the word. Of course Wiki is not interested in this, wiki only finds commonly used name.
About Česko on Czech wiki: Official political name Česka republika only represents years 1993 forward. If articles like "History of 'Česká republika'" or "History of brewery in 'Česká republika'" contain middle ages, kings and queens, it is nonsense. Czech wiki had three options. 1) keep this ahistoric nonsense 2) use term "České země" (meaning "Czech lands" 3) use "Česko". Wikipedists saw, that Česko is gaining popularity while České země will never come back into fashion (and there are no official lands in CZ), so they picked Česko maybe ahead of time, but the course was clear and it server wikipedia purpose of easier naming and categorization.
If Česko is winning among news sources, it is then clear why it was picked. Or should twitter comments and facebook posts be considered more relevant?
EN wiki chose "Czech lands" instead, but it may change as soon as the trend will be apparent.
Chrzwzcz (talk) 08:11, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

To ask three people on the square and look through two twitter accounts (which understandably use formal name) and make an article about it. Journalism at its best! Real RS :) It is official only 3 months, it was approved 5 months ago and "discussed to be approved" 6 months ago. Czech Republic does not have big media coverage so it is much harder (bad timing with Olympics didn't help, it was too late to change the jerseys). We will see in a year... possibly the same because government officials are very lazy with the use of what they agreed on. But to sum up: 3-6 months is very soon to tell. So your quick judgement "failure" is off. Usage between Czechs - well they speak Czech, so... we'll see after/if sport will use it :) You as Wikipedia would not admit after 3-6 months "it catched on, let's change the title", so don't tell "it failed and it cannot be saved, it is done" :) Chrzwzcz (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

I know at least one Czech guy who likes the name Czechia and always uses it in English when referring to his home country. So the statement that 'nobody' calls it so is wrong. Hum Hum (talk) 07:53, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
That was meant as hyperbole, not literally. --Khajidha (talk) 11:57, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Chrzwzcz; it's too soon to tell anything. We will know more in a year, or longer.--Mojo Hand (talk) 14:17, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
So far I am mostly seeing an increase in usage of Czechia amongst the English press of non-English speaking countries (Belarusian and Azezi media are the ones I see most) and a slight increase in smaller sources from English speaking countries (a cannabis culture website is one of the main ones I see). Usage is undoubtedly increasing, but it is still a long way to go before the general trend of "Czech Republic" changes. --Khajidha (talk) 14:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
We had an article in Czech and there it was said that in spring it will be decided about sport jerseys for years 2018-2020, so it is made in huge advance, no "half of year passed, it failed". Nevertheless sport ministry hasn't told sport associations "use Czechia now", so maybe we won't see it any time soon during sport events. Simply put the government decided that "Czechia" is the correct variant (not Czech/Czechland/Bohemia, as sometimes seen) but it is very lazy to push it. And again about the 6 months - It took Czech short name "Česko" about 15 years to gain trust and it is still among some considered ugly. It is not matter of months, it would be easier if it was actual renaming (and hence necessary to use), not just addition of missing "nickname". Chrzwzcz (talk) 17:45, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Um, I can custom order sports jerseys with a turnaround time of about a WEEK, why does the Czech government need a year?--Khajidha (talk) 18:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
I can only speculate but - As you can see next time jerseys are ordered for 3 years. So current ones, current style and design, are valid maybe 2015-2017?! If they would change it now, it would cost extra money. To change them in expected time costs nothing more, it would be changed anyway. Same with promotional materials (for tourism etc.). Slow and cheap rebranding it is. It is very veeery bad for quick adoption, but at least it feels less forced. Czechs would hate it if it would come out that it needs lots of money :) We know, because in April one minister panicked that we would have to return money from EU funds, 1 billion CZK, because of the change in promo action "Czech Republic Land of Stories". So other minister ensured that nothing has to be changed now, but in time... when jerseys are out of fashion, promo materials outdated, promo action finished, etc. "Czech Republic" is still valid so what's the rush, that could be their motto. It clearly was not timed to explode at one moment with Czechia here Czechia there Czechia everywhere. The entry into UN database was just considered as paying of long debt, I guess, to end the uncertainty which short form is official. Chrzwzcz (talk) 22:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

And one new article, it is from a Czech site but in English, and more informative than a poll among 3 people on a square as famous Guardian did: Czechia still seeks to put itself on the map Chrzwzcz (talk) 17:54, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

2017 World Almanac in nations of the world section is using Czechia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.80.163 (talk) 18:22, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Now, THAT shows some actual increase in usage. Still not the common name, but it is not the "what the heck kind of keyboard vomit is this" that it was to most people before.--Khajidha (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Czech_Republic/Archive_5&oldid=1143744766"