Talk:Krzysztof "Piorun" Radziwiłł

Lightning or Thunderbolt?

I believe that this article should have appropriate name Krzysztof Radziwiłł the Thunderbolt or Krzysztof "the Thunderbolt " Radziwiłł not Piorun M.K. 21:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Nicknames should be translated.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Should be "the Thunder" in English. Juraune 15:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually it should be the lightning. Thunder(bolt) would be grom, not piorun. Just as with ORP Grom and ORP Piorun.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Moved to "the Lightning" together with 3 other relatives. Don't be shy on redirects. Renata 00:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I supppose, it should be "Thunder".Iulius (talk) 08:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Why? As I explained above, piorun is lightning, grzmot is thunder.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 17:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I think Thunderbolt is more accurate. lightning is more "female" means sudden lightening of sky. Thunderbolt is translation of Polish Piorun and Lithuanian Perkunas and means lightening of sky with acusstic thunder. Lithuanian God Perkunas (Piorun) like Zeus had thunderboldts in his celestial arsenal :). Ultimate argument for name of Radvila should be citation in English historical bibliography as well ... Mathiasrex (talk) 20:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

More on the nickname

This page does not appear to be in conformance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people). Should it be Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł (Reichsfürst) or something of that sort? --Flex (talk|contribs) 17:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Starost of...?

kokenhauski, solecki, żyżmorski, urzędowski, aiński, borysowski and nowomyski. could anybody translate this to a more understandable way? Iulius 06:29, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The good way to do it IMHO is 'starost of [city name]'. Unfortunatly those Polish adjectives do not always translate nicely into city names; at some point I'd like to a list to help us with that, like the one I did for Voivodes of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but I still have not found enough refs for that.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  16:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 13:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Former Seventh-day Adventists

What is know his religious stance?--Vojvodae 15:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

He now describes himself as an agnostic. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 11:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.158.93 (talk)

---

He used and signed his name as Christophorus Radziwil

Christophorus or Christopher Radziwil should be the name used by Wikipedia, see his signature in a book [1]. Why is Wikipedia featuring him under a Polish name of Krzysztof Mikolaj Radzill ?

Name should be moved to Christopher Radziwil(l) Observing (71.137.195.132 (talk) 17:45, 22 June 2009 (UTC))

People used to sign their name in Latin. So what? That didn't make them Latins.radek (talk) 18:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

---

So what??? People sign with the name they are known under.

If he signed himself with the tong twister "Krzysztof Mikołaj "the Thunderbolt" Radziwiłł" as you and a few of likeminded people insist on, then please be so kind and enlighten us and post a photo right here

............. Thank you. Observing (71.137.195.132 (talk) 05:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC))

---

A lot of nobles used latin, which doesn't mean that was their primary language. As Radek noted, they were not Latin. Anyway, that's not his signature, but of Krzysztof Radziwiłł. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

---

I was wandering about the year (1603) and the Christophorus Radziwil signature. The father Christopher Radziwill is said to have died in 1603.

Both, the father and the son were named Christoph Radziwil(l), the father is referred to as Christopher I Radziwill and the son as Christoph II Radziwil(l). Neither persons name is Krzysztof Mikołaj in English, which this is supposed to be an English language Wikipedia, but in many cases it is not.

And what about signatures of the person(s), signed as Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł ??? Observing (71.137.195.132 (talk) 18:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC))

Requested move 2 January 2022

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Krzysztof "Piorun" Radziwiłł. It's long overdue that someone closes this, and there's the consensus to move somewhere; and this one has seen most acceptance. No such user (talk) 15:21, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Krzysztof Mikołaj "Perkūnas" Radziwiłł → Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł – "Perkunas" isn't used anywhere in the literature, form "Krzysztof "Piorun" Radzwiłł is used by Robert I. Frost "The Northern Wars:War, State and Society in Northeastern Europe, 1558 - 1721". Best is to move to neutral "Krzysztof Mikołaj Radzwiłł" and use the nickname within article Marcelus (talk) 00:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. -- Aervanath (talk) 15:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 06:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nominator and WP:NICKNAME. This seems obvious and could have been a technical request. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
• @Marcelus and BarrelProof: What should be Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł (1898-1986) moved to? Sawol (talk) 11:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Sawol: I didn't realise this page exist. So in that case let's maybe move this page to Krzysztof Mikołaj "Piorun" Radziwiłł or Krzysztof "Piorun" Radziwiłł? Marcelus (talk) 11:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

  Oh, I obviously hadn't noticed that either. I suppose we should find some distinguishing role identifier or we may need to put dates into the title of both articles. There is some helpful guidance at WP:NCPDAB. 16:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)—⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk)

• Move to Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł and Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł (politician, born 1898). The 16th-century prince seems to be the clear primary topic. But no nicknames. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Necrothesp: Many articles about the members of this family include nicknames: Mikołaj "the Black" Radziwiłł, Mikołaj "the Red" Radziwiłł, Mikołaj Krzysztof "the Orphan" Radziwiłł (should be Sierotka btw), Michał Kazimierz "Rybeńko" Radziwiłł, also other Polish noble: Stanisław "Rewera" Potocki. They are more known under the nicknames very often. Just adding the context, for me the name can be without a nickname Marcelus (talk) 14:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

  However, it goes against our standard naming conventions for every other country. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support some move. I like nicknames, but per NICKNAME they are not ideal, plus I am concerned what language should be used for the nickname in text... Lithuanian wasn't as popular back then as Polish, Belarusian or Latin, I think. English would be ok. The article was stable at Krzysztof Mikołaj "the Thunderbolt" Radziwiłł for a long time, not sure why it was moved (the editor who did so, User:Lembit Staan, did not provide explanation beyond an edit summary "ignorant translation", and seems inactive these days). Anyway, I'd suggest using Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł (hetman) as I think it was the highest of his positions. Not sure if we should move the other one and create a disambig or if one is a primary. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Piotrus: Looks like the situation is more complicated because it seems that his real name was just "Krzysztof Radziwiłł" (according to Polish Biographical Dictionary), the second name is applied to him sometimes only because it confuses his patronimic "Mikołajewicz" for an actual name. So we need a disambig with his son Krzysztof Radzwiłł. It seems like the only solution is Krzysztof Radziwiłł (1547–1603) and Krzysztof Radziwiłł (1585-1640) Marcelus (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Marcelus Interesting. His son, Krzysztof Radziwiłł, was also a hetman. Dates are fine but we do need to sort this naming mess, pl wiki for the record calls his son Krzysztof II Radziwiłł in the lead... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Piotrus: Robert I. Frost uses name "Krzysztof II Radziwiłł" and "Krzysztof Radziwiłł"/"Krzysztof Radziwiłł Piorun", also Krzysztof Radzwiłł „Młodszy” ("the Younger") is possible. Marcelus (talk) 12:11, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Marcelus I've seen "the Younger" used occasionally in Polish contexts on en wiki, need to check if Polish literature uses Młodszy here. It's a thought. I do oppose using Piorun without parenthesis, btw, do you have any thoughts on the Piorun vs Perkunas, not just in name but as used in the article's text? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:44, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Piotrus "Perkūnas" is absolutely nonsensical and ahistorical in this context, KR wasn't Lithuanian speaker so weren't people around him, version "Perkūnas" isn't used in the English literature. What's more "Perkūnas" is the name of Lithuanian god, "piorun" in Lithuanian is "žaibas". Marcelus (talk) 12:26, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

• Relisting comment - @Marcelus, Piotrus, BarrelProof, Sawol, and Necrothesp: Wanting to see, with all that has now been presented, if everyone so far participating in this discussion feels a consensus can be reached? — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 06:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

  I'd say that first, we can see there was no support for the move that happened few years ago, so if we cannot reach a consensus, that move should be reverted. As for the new better name, we have several options but indeed not one that has strong support. I'd suggest leaving this for a while, maybe few more new people will help break the deadlock? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

  PS. Options I see as valid: 1a) Krzysztof Mikołaj "Piorun" Radziwiłł, 1b) Krzysztof Mikołaj "the Thunderbolt" Radziwiłł (the old name that this was moved away from with no discussions few years back), 2) Krzysztof Radziwiłł (1547–1603), 3) Krzysztof Radziwiłł the Older. Frankly I like 1) best, since in Polish historiography, nicknames are common and memorable for people of that period. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

  We need to drop "Mikołaj", since it's not historically accurate. Also the "the Thunderbolt" isn't used in English literature. IMO our options are 1) Krzysztof "Piorun" Radziwiłł and 2) Krzysztof Radziwiłł (1547–1603). I prefer the first one, those nicknames in case of Radzwiłłs are even more important than their actual names. Marcelus (talk) 09:59, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

  Fair enough. This makes it two votes for K"P"R I guess, more than any other option I think :P _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:14, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

  I continue to suggest not putting a nickname in quotes in the article title, per WP:NICKNAME, especially since there seems to be no evidence that he has been consistently referred to that way in English. Disambiguation should be done some other way. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

  @BarrelProof Plenty of hits for Thunderbolt Radziwiłł on Gscholar: [2]. Although Piorun is even more common (here search results controlled for English hits with the addition of the adjective Polish): [3]. I'll also note that NICKNAME does not say "don't use nicknames", it effectively says "adhere to COMMMONNAME", and it's pretty clear that the nickname Piorun (often translated to English as the Thunderbolt) is used as part of his common name in both Polish and English. QED, really. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

  There is also the Thunder. I think it's really the best to use "Piorun" in the title, and explain it within article. Marcelus (talk) 09:50, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

  I saw at least one translation as the "Lightning Bolt" and yes, it's best to use Polish original with a footnote or such on what it means in English. I wonder which translation - or original - would prefer User:Nihil novi, whom I'll ping as they may find this discussion of some interest, and I value their input, doubly so when it comes to any translation relation issues. PS. Old discussion is above #Lightning or Thunderbolt? and I find it interesting how my views have changed, regarding translation of nicknames... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:27, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 17:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ortizesp: Per prior comments, that title is occupied. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

• Two Polish print encyclopedias that I've consulted list our Radziwiłł as "Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł, epithet Piorun".

"Piorun" translates into English as "lightning" or "thunderbolt".

On Wikipedia, the principal term for that natural phenomenon is "lightning". "Thunderbolt" is discussed mainly in relation to religion, mythology, and the like.

Our Radziwiłł received his epithet Piorun for his "lightning-fast" military operations. One does not speak of "thunderbolt-fast" operations.

The Polish Wikipedia "Krzysztof Radziwiłł" disambiguation page lists the three individuals discussed on this English Wikipedia talk page. The titles of the articles on the first two, 16th- and 17th-century, individuals include their life dates. This is very uncommunicative and confusing to a naive reader.

On balance, I would title the present article "Krzysztof Mikołaj 'Lightning' Radziwiłł", without life dates.

Our Radziwiłł's son, "Krzysztof Radziwiłł" – who appears in our English Wikipedia under that over-laconic title – "sometimes referred to as Krzysztof Radziwiłł II, to distinguish him from his father, Krzysztof Mikołaj 'Piorun' Radziwłł", does not appear to have an epithet. For disambiguation considerations, the son's article could be retitled "Krzysztof II Radziwiłł", as he appears in the lead to his Polish Wikipedia article.

Alternatively, for the principal Radziwiłł in question, I could support "Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł", as proposed by Marcelus.

Best, Nihil novi (talk) 22:13, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

• @Nihil novi: We already established that he didn't actually have a second name, he was Krzysztof Radziwiłł, or Krzysztof Mikołajewicz Radziwiłł, after his father. I don't know any English literature that uses epithet "Lightning", although I agree it's probably the best translation, epithets that are used are: "Thunder", "Thunderbolt" or "Piorun". In my opinion the last one is the best, because as we cann see no English translation is perfect Marcelus (talk) 09:48, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Why does Piorun's name appear as "Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł" in the Polish Wikipedia; in Encyklopedia Powszechna PWN, 1975, vol. 3, p. 774; in Encyklopedia Polski, Kraków, Wydawnictwo Ryszard Kluszczyński, 1996, p. 564; and on Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22Krzysztof+Mikolaj+Radziwill%22+&btnG=) ?

IMHO "Lightning" is perfect, and has the advantage of being immediately understood by an English-speaker.

Nihil novi (talk) 11:09, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't perfect. Polish Biographical Dictionary, which has the most authority on these matters, calls him Krzysztof Radziwiłł and explains why he is mistakenly called "Krzysztof Mikołaj". "Lighting" is probably the best translation, although not perfect, but it's not the version used in literature Marcelus (talk) 15:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Is Polski słownik biograficzny the only source for "Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł" allegedly not having had the second given name, "Mikołaj"? PSB bases this statement on his assertedly not having included "Mikołaj" in his signatures. In fact it is not unknown for people not to use, or to abbreviate or otherwise modify, one or another given name. James Earl Carter Jr. skipped his second given name, calling himself "Jimmy Carter". Thomas Woodrow Wilson eschewed "Thomas", styling himself "Woodrow Wilson". John Edgar Hoover signed himself "J. Edgar Hoover". There is a difference between not having a name and not using it.

On Wikipedia we regularly translate Polish texts into English, sometimes correcting obvious mistranslations. Given how our Radziwiłł earned his epithet Piorun by his "lightning" military operations, it seems perfectly reasonable to render Piorun as "Lightning". In World War II, the Germans did not practice "Thunderbolt War" but "Lightning War" (Blitzkrieg).

Nihil novi (talk) 21:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

@Nihil novi: PSB isn't the only one source that doesn't use a second name, every newer source follows it. That's beyond the question that the person we are talking about was using only one name "Krzysztof", so we can drop it. And no, we don't simply translate from Polish to English, if the person, as it is in this case, is well covered in the English literature, we use forms used there. And none English source use the force "Lightining" so we cannot use that one either. Marcelus (talk) 17:34, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

I regret to disagree about the correcting of English misrenderings of Polish terms. Example: the previously published, incorrect wording, "Historical policy of the Law and Justice party" has been corrected on Wikipedia to "History policy of the Law and Justice party". Nihil novi (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

That's not the same, we are talking about different things here, it's not the same as correcting grammatical errors. Marcelus (talk) 08:59, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Decisions concerning proper grammar involve interpretation – as does the question of whether the epithet Piorun is, in the case of this Radziwiłł, better rendered as "Thunderbolt" or "Lightning".

Facts, including epithets, can be misinterpreted, as can grammatical usage. When this happens, there is no necessity to keep the misinterpretation.

"Thunderbolt" and "lightning" carry different connotations. A "thunderbolt" may figuratively be "an event [rather than a person] that is terrible, horrific or unexpected". "Lightning", by contrast, may figuratively be "anything that moves very fast"; used as an adjective, it describes something that is "extremely fast or sudden; moving (as if) at the speed of lightning". The context of our Radziwiłł's life speaks for the latter sense of "Piorun" ("Lightning").

Nihil novi (talk) 19:52, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.