Jump to content

Talk:Olga Kharlan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Olha Kharlan)

Olga or Olha

[edit]

Could someone tell me what her first name really is? Page does not explain this situation. Rockies77 (talk) 08:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disclaimer: I'm not a linguist and I don't speak Russian nor Ukrainian; I just wondered the same thing and looked into it. “Olha” is to the correct English transliteration of Ukrainian Ольга, “Olga” being the transliteration of the Russian name equivalent. Ukrainian г is pronounced /ɦ/; in this case you're supposed to pronounce a breathy-voiced 'a'. In practice what her Ukranian entourage calls her sounds a lot like the English usual pronunciation of "Olga". I'll clarify the point in the intro. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See conversation below, which bears not precisely on your question -- what her name "really is," but the question of what RSs call her. --2603:7000:2101:AA00:EC1C:CD7F:B9E4:D434 (talk) 04:05, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 2 external links on Olha Kharlan. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 13:45, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 2 external links on Olha Kharlan. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 00:29, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

World Championships disqualification section too long

[edit]

The World Championships disqualification section of this article seems to me to be too long... Especially as it seems that today Kharlan has qualified for Olympics. Kharlan is not as big worldwide as Messi and Ronaldo, the information in the section is too much compared with Kharlan's notability. You might consider putting stuff in footnotes as I have done with the article about Yuriy Lutsenko (who is not a sportsmen btw). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:21, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The information might also be better of in the Opposition to Russia-part of the article (but then also trimmed down; again I recommend my Lutsenko-footnote thing). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:23, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that some of it should be converted to notes, but certainly not everything. I formatted certain portions as notes.—Alalch E. 22:56, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I like Elina Svitolina a lot, but her personal opinion about something that she is not personally involved with (Kharlan's disqualification) does not belong here in this Wikipedia article. Except for mabey in a footnote. The World Championships disqualification section is way too long for an encyclopedia and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 12:30, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like her a lot. But she is highly notable. The handshake issue is one she has been at the forefront of in sports. And her statements are widely covered in RSs. Which is really the guiding star. --2603:7000:2101:AA00:EC1C:CD7F:B9E4:D434 (talk) 04:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 30 July 2023

[edit]
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. I noticed two emerging arguments; Olga is used as the WP:COMMONNAME in sources, while Olha is adherent to Ukrainian orthography, and considering Kharlan is Ukrainian, it is more in line with how some other articles are named based on nationality and orthography of the local language. I ultimately found the COMMONNAME arguments in favor of Olga to be stronger, and after over a month of discussion, this should be closed. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sennecaster (Chat) 04:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Olha Kharlan → Olga Kharlan – the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources; see WP:COMMONNAME); 6.870 million vs 0.075 million google hits; the current name should still be a redirect 2603:7000:2101:AA00:2CF5:4959:8F33:F1E (talk) 04:19, 29 July 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). 2603:7000:2101:AA00:B90B:DAA9:2A4:E56C (talk) 08:20, 30 July 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 12:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom. See also the references and external links section, including her Instagram page. I see one reference with "Olha" in the title, and one external link (archived) that uses "Olha". Many with "Olga". SilverLocust 💬 09:59, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Google Web Search’s reported results is not a measure of usage in reliable sources. See WP:SET. —Michael Z. 07:40, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, it's a relatively weak test, but the references and external links also show Olga being used much more often. (One of those external links is the IOC listing mentioned by the below unsigned admin comment.) Here is Ngrams if you would like to peruse that very helpful source (no results). A Google News search for olha OR olga kharlan gave me 9/10 top results using Olga, though listing them would take a modicum of effort. SilverLocust 💬 08:49, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not a single one of those things is an indication that one or the other spelling has a higher frequency of use in reliable sources or constitutes the single most commonly used name. The onus is on proponents of the change to show evidence, not just fill the discussion with vaguely related observations.  —Michael Z. 14:43, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Total red herring. Are you giggling as you type that? This string is replete with support - per wp:commonname guidelines - for the spelling called for. Your approach would leave wp:commonname without any effect. Obviously, that is not the intent. And if it were followed, there would never be an article name change. Not sure what you are driven by here. But just look at all the examples in this string, and how she herself spells her name, and how the FIE spells her name. Seriously ... --2603:7000:2101:AA00:CCC9:7E7B:26A9:1834 (talk) 18:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No opinion yet, but she is listed NOW by the international federation under a certain name. Until/unless this has been changed, this is clearly her COMMONNAME. (I have not checked what this name is, to avoid accusations in bias).--Ymblanter (talk) 16:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    On the contrary, COMMONNAME says “Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources).” —Michael Z. 15:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but for athletes it is always the same thing, since the majority of sources use an officially used name. I can not think of a single exception (not taking the situations when the name was changed). Ymblanter (talk) 16:44, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Do they? Well in media and publications the spelling seems to be split, so maybe they do not, or maybe there has been a WP:NAMECHANGE. If we were to chose to use the official name over the COMMONNAME, then whose official name: FIE, the IOC, Kharlan’s national Olympic committee, her personal website, etcetera?  —Michael Z. 18:37, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FIE and IOC, they should be using the same name. Ymblanter (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Query: I am wondering where the h spelling comes from. The Cyrillic original is normally (always?) transliterated as g. Kdammers (talk) 02:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Ukrainian Г is transliterated H. The G/H difference is a common signifier distinguishing many similar words or names from Russian and Ukrainian, for example Lugansk/Luhansk. Not only was the Russian language impose on Ukraine historically, but the Ukrainian letter Ґ (G) was banned and the official Soviet transliteration system turned Latin H into G. As a result, many Ukrainian names were officially romanized with G on people’s passports, for example.  —Michael Z. 03:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to our best evidence indicating (as shown above) that the change meets wp:common name, she herself uses the now-suggested spelling I proposed. As does for example the FIE and Olympics.com and the New York Times and USA Today and the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post and the Guardian and the Independent and the Financial Times and Kyiv Independent and BBC and The Times and the National Post and the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star. It's frankly overwhelming. Any person looking at the evidence as reflected by google searching the major RSs in English cannot avoid but seeing that - without question - the new suggested spelling has a higher frequency of use in reliable sources and constitutes the single most commonly used name. Which is perhaps not surprising -- given that the above google search show that spelling to be used 91,600 -- not a misprint -- times over the existing spelling. Seriously, there's no reason to extend this conversation rather than to seek to waste all of our collective time. (2603:7000:2101:AA00:EC1C:CD7F:B9E4:D434 (talk) 03:19, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: Needs systematic evidence for or against this being the WP:COMMONNAME. The only systematic evidence presented, the google search hits, is not suitable due to it including unreliable results and due to WP:GOOGLETEST#Google distinct page count issues. BilledMammal (talk) 12:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There phrase "systemic evidence" does not appear in wp:common name. What is says is "Wikipedia ... generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources) ..." There is no "systemic" test that is perfect - gnews searches are woefully limited in scope, for example. The google search and a look at what it turns up, as reflected by Necrothesp above, is very clearly in support of Olga satisfying wp:commonname. A look at all the top RS sources by circulation returns the same very clear conclusion. While secondary to it all, she herself uses that spelling in her social media account, and the official sports organizations do the same. It's really somewhat surprising to see anyone supporting any contrary conclusion here. (I'm the same IP as above, btw). 2603:7000:2101:AA00:302D:44BE:9765:30A7 (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which “Google search”? I’ve already pointed out the search links given in the OP are contrary to both WP:COMMONNAME and WP:SET: it gives no information about the most commonly used name in reliable sources (and the reported numbers are inaccurate, although that doesn’t matter).  —Michael Z. 18:37, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The google searches in the first paragraph above. Plus - look at the RSs pointed to. They are representative of the top RS publications by circulation in English. As Necrothesp points out. My review, and the other RSs linked to above, also reflect what Necrothesp says. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:394B:5C53:C675:83F8 (talk) 05:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Again: those Google Web Search results are not indicators of WP:COMMONNAME in reliable sources. How many times do I have to state it?
A search engine may help to collect this data; when using a search engine, restrict the results to pages written in English, and exclude the word "Wikipedia". When using Google, generally a search of Google Books and News Archive should be defaulted to before a web search, as they concentrate reliable sources (exclude works from Books, LLC when searching Google Books). Search engine results are subject to certain biases and technical limitations; for detailed advice on the use of search engines and the interpretation of their results, see Wikipedia:Search engine test.
What are “top” RS publications and which guideline make us care? A test of frequency means don’t be selective, but survey all RS or a cross-section.  —Michael Z. 14:07, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All true. But for some reason that escapes me, come editors do not care that it is - quite clearly to all who search for which name is most common - as you say, the most common name. I don't quite understand their motivation. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:1CA:8B4:E5A8:B2D0 (talk) 05:06, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Martial arts has been notified of this discussion. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Ukraine has been notified of this discussion. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:04, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Olympics has been notified of this discussion. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - WP:UCN. If she transliterates her name a certain way, who are we to tell her she is wrong? Schierbecker (talk) 00:58, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Without relying on Google numbers, I agree with the impression of editors above that Olga Kharlan is noticeably more common (and also is presumably her preference too). One source cited in the article (BBC 2012) even writes about "Olga Kharlan" at the same time as team-mate "Olha Zhovnir". Unfortunately despite the understandable desire for standardized romanization, real-world practice does not necessarily follow any one standardized system, especially when it comes to personal names. Adumbrativus (talk) 05:32, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Olga_Kharlan&oldid=1205699561"