Talk:New Belgrade

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New Belgrade article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Serbia: Belgrade High‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Belgrade task force (marked as High-importance).

Copyright

Added copyright information to article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SGS (talk • contribs) 13:00, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those are removed now. --Tadija^taking 10:18, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Wales

Exactly how relevant is that Jimmy Wales quote? Matisia 10:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neighborhoods

Several more neighborhoods are currently under construction: Airport City Belgrade, Delta City, Park Apartments, Savograd and Univerzitetsko Selo. Delta city is finished. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.185.121.193 (talk) 00:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:New Belgrade skyline.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:New Belgrade skyline.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:10, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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: page moved. (non-admin closure) Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Novi Beograd → New Belgrade – Name should be consistent with Belgrade. A quick Google search also reveals 22,000,000 results for 'New Belgrade' and only 2,900,000 for 'Novi Beograd'. Buttons (talk) 05:19, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I converted Buttons's comment to a full RM format No such user (talk) 11:02, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:UE. This inconsistency has always bothered me; while English does not have proper exonyms for many places, for Belgrade it certainly does, and New Belgrade is a logical consequence. I didn't check Google searches, but I have little doubt that New Belgrade dominates in English-language texts. No such user (talk) 11:07, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- User:No such user, why do you have little doubt? — AjaxSmack 23:31, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nominator and No such user Stepojevac (talk) 14:19, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice to have some analysis of reliable sources and some other evidence to consider. I assume good faith of the nominator but with a regular Google search, I get 288 hits for "New Belgrade" and 326 hits for "Novi Beograd" (many not in English in the latter case). The consistency argument is weak. We have Gorizia/Nova Gorica, Laredo/Nuevo Laredo, Əyricə/Yeni Əyricə, and Ulm/Neu-Ulm at Wikipedia because we base titles on common names. — AjaxSmack 23:31, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@AjaxSmack:: None of those has an English exonym; I don't think that anyone refers to Novi Sad as New Garden, but for Belgrade a call for consistency is just too strong. Anyway, I went through first 100 hits of your "Novi Beograd" search, and 97 is in Serbian, 1 in German and just 2 in English, one of which is our article. No such user (talk) 16:15, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not advocating anything, just seeking information. I simply feel arguments like "logical consequence", "little doubt", "a call for"^{[by whom?]} are not based in policy. Up until your breakdown of the languages of "Novi Beograd" hits, there was zero evidence in support of a move except for unlinked inflated Google stats. I'm not sure I buy the exonym argument, either. Just because Belgrade is an exonym does not mean all other appended derived names would necessarily follow. Usage for other such cities seems mixed (New Copenhagen, Moscow City 2, and Warsaw New Town but Bucureștii Noi, Alta de Lisboa, Centro Direzionale di Milano, and Novi Zagreb). — AjaxSmack 18:44, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support per current state of article New Taipei City and others. - Anonimski (talk) 23:02, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - "New Belgrade is" vs "Novi Beograd is" show pretty well equal results, with more popular/up to date books such as Bradt favouring the existing title. The support votes above should be discounted by any closing admin as not based in en.wp:title policy of following reliable sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's hard to extrapolate anything on ~19 GBook hits for each. True, Lawrence Mitchell in Bradt guide does use "Novi Beograd", but other books are from 1960s; in two others, I see constructs like "New Belgrade — or Novi Beograd — is a ..." and "New Belgrade (Novi Beograd) is the quarter..." On the other side, there is Norris, [1]. Granted, when I execute query like [2] "Novi Beograd" +district vs. [3] "New Belgrade"+district, there is a similar situation, with about equal number of hits (the former yields some more, but with more of false positives such as addresses or gazetteer data included). No such user (talk) 13:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. While Belgrade is the overwhelmingly common English name for the city, this Anglicisation hasn't so commonly extended to this district. We don't need to translate everything if it isn't commonly translated. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:59, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Evidence that this Anglicisation hasn't so commonly extended to this district (my emphasis)? And there's evidence above and below that it is commonly extended to this district, so assuming that you mean the so to be significant, it's a weakened argument anyway. Andrewa (talk) 01:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support In English language literature almost unexceptionally term used is New Belgrade.[4] Alex^{discussion ★} 18:16, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per WP:NC; "New Belgrade" is at once more recognizable. Since it seems like English acceptance of the exonym is mixed, let's just go with the more recognizable title. Red Slash 21:35, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support, for reasons already given by others, and also the fact that it's a suburb of Belgrade makes the anglicised version all the more recognisable to English speakers, and the current title confusing. Andrewa (talk) 01:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.