Talk:Baltic Sea

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Suggestion of new pages about Baltic Sea[edit]

I have checked the current pages about Baltic Sea, and there is little about the environmental status and about health issues related to Baltic Sea (especially swimming and fish eating). I know several people who are experts on this, and I suggest that we take an international collaborative effort to improve the current situation. The people I know could edit Wikipedias in English, Swedish, and Finnish. All the listed pages should be mentioned on the main article about the Baltic Sea on each language. ping: User:Giantflightlessbirds, sv:User:Josefina Algotsson --Jtuom (talk) 07:07, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested improvements to pages related to Baltic Sea
Page Suggested update Rationale
English Swedish Finnish
Baltic Sea Science Center sv:Baltic Sea Science Center (does it not have a Swedish name?) fi:Baltic Sea Science Center (missing page) Write more of the scientific content of the Science Center The center is an important source of scientific information about the Baltic Sea
Water quality in the Baltic Sea sv:Vattenkvalitet i Östersjön fi:Itämeren vedenlaatu All pages are missing. Write about both environmental quality (nutrients, algae growth, salt pulses and their impact on fisheries(?)) and health quality (quality for swimming, e.g. vibrio and other microbes). Related pages: Baltic Sea hypoxia, Water quality is a practical issue for citizens and they should be able to learn about the basic science behind it.
Pollutants in the Baltic Sea sv:Miljögifter i Östersjön fi:Itämeren ympäristömyrkyt All pages are missing. There are heavy loads of dioxins, PCBs, methylmercury and other pollutants in the Baltic Sea. These are also found from the fish, and people get exposed when they consume Baltic fish, especially fatty fish such as Baltic herring. These issues should be described, and also some time trends to show that the situation about dioxins and PCBs have remarkably improved (less change with methylmercury), and nutrients loads are probably slightly improving.
After visiting the Baltic Sea Science Center (they do not have a Swedish name) I offered to meet with them while I was still in Stockholm and develop a Wikipedia/Commons/Wikidata strategy. Unfortunately, they haven't replied, and I don't have a contact email address or phone number for the curators or director (all contact information is for Skansen as a whole). I suggest partnering with them and their expertise and publications list to improve these articles. I created an English article for the Baltic Sea Science Center based entirely on Swedish sources, and will nominate it for Did You Know? in the next day or so. But they could contribute so many photos and videos, and help improve the articles on numerous Baltic species, especially Baltic herring – science communcation is literally their job. I would also suggest that we concentrate on improving the Biology section in the main article(s) first, adding well-referenced sections on water quality and pollutants that cite numerous recent studies. These could then be spun off as longer independent articles. Finally, I suggest we improve the main Baltic Sea article (at least, the Biology section) in Danish, Russian, Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Estonian, and German as well as Swedish and Finnish (who have I missed?), as having at least that basic information available to those language communities would make a big differences. Anyway, these are my thoughts as a visitor from New Zealand! —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 09:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree environment is important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 007Леони́д (talk • contribs) 07:42, 23 January 2020 (UTC) strike sock puppet[reply]

Oblast[edit]

(moved from my talk page --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:51, 17 May 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Just as I mentioned in the edit's comment, I happen to know cyrillic script and Greek. I had to learn it, for some reason, which isn't particularly useful except perhaps being able to read Russian script and being able to read road signs back when I was in Europe, in Greece couple of years ago :) Just as I said, what we have here is just a Russian word область ("oblast", sign-by-sign + so called "soft sign" at the end). To me, someone with little knowledge of EN simply transcribed RUS word because he/she didn't know word "region". If you Google "oblast" the only references point to Wikipedia and it spreaded in Wikipedia. If you check "Kaliningrad", an actual article's name is "Kaliningrad Region" - I changed the name of a link too. To the point though, I think there's no point to introduce a new word. Honestly speaking, when I first encountered this "oblast" thing I had no idea what it was. This is English Wikipedia, right? Programmer Physicist (talk) 18:43, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really at a loss about how to be more explicit than pointing you to Kaliningrad Oblast. I mean, do you think your knowledge of cyrillic script obviates the surpassingly well-documented use of the term in current contexts? There's four dozen contemporary sources here that show that the term is neither obsolete nor unused in English. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really at a loss with you being so stubborn. Is it personal to you? I mean, we have a perfect word "region", which has an exactly the same meaning as Russian "oblast". Why use directly transcribed Russian word instead of a word that *already exists*?

Programmer Physicist (talk) 19:04, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Programmer Physicist: Let's get one thing clear, buster. We have a fundamental mechanic called WP:BRD. This requires you to not keep reverting when an edit of yours is objected too. The article is returned to the state BEFORE the objectionable edit, the issue is discussed on the talk page, and THEN changes can be implemented (or not) based on the outcome. You do NOT get to barrel your edits in while this discussion is still ongoing. - I'm giving you one more opportunity to stick to the program here. If you revert again to your challenged changes, next stop is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As to the topic at hand. You do not present any reasonable argument why a more general term should be used if the specific term Kaliningrad Oblast is so evidently in use. It's the official denomination of the region, it's as specific as possible, and gunning for a replacement because it's "not an English word" is entirely unconvincing based on the sourcing. Why do you think that article has this name, and uses it dozens of times, instead of Kaliningrad Region (which is a redirect to it)? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:28, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tell you what. First off, watch your mouth. I'm not any "buster" to you.
Next, since this is an English Wikipedia *there's no point using Russian words*.
Just because this word was used before it doesn't mean we need to keep making mistakes. Yes, mistakes. "Oblast" means region. If we start using words from different languages it will no longer be an English Wikipedia. Just a common sense.
But hey... You're not willing to discuss, huh? It's about to make sure your version is the right version.
Because of your attitude you've been reported. Programmer Physicist (talk) 20:19, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are 46 oblasts (translated as provinces or regions) in Russia. [1] Do we really want to change each and every one of them, and each of their mentions in other articles, from "oblast" to "region"? Why?!!! FollowTheSources (talk) 21:20, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can do that, really. Or, at least, try to reintroduce the word "region" gradually.
Why? Because there's no such word. "Oblast" doesn't exist in English and we're editing English Wikipedia. People read it around the world and presumably also learn English from here. Honestly, the first time I encountered that word I had to look it up in the dictionary. It's a Russian word, transcribed letter by letter. Let's leave this word for Russian language.
As I said, probably someone with poor English, with no bad intentions, introduced word "oblast" and it stuck.
So, to summarize, I really can do it. Tell me what you think. Programmer Physicist (talk) 21:41, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, "Kaliningrad" doesn't exist in English, either, except as a transliteration of a foreign word, just like "oblast". No, I don't see any reason to purge all of these foreign terms from our English encyclopedia and limit ourselves to the English-speaking world. If you disagree, then based on what I read on that edit-warring page, I think you need to get a consensus from Wikipedia:WikiProject Soviet Union to make such a broad change, probably through an RFC. I don't think this will happen, but you're free to try. You're not free to just make these changes unilaterally. FollowTheSources (talk) 22:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kaliningrad is a name of a region, so it can't be an English word - let's not confuse the name of something with the word that has a particular meaning and is perfectly translatable.
And by no means would I want to purge non-English-world-related articles! As far as I know it is the English version which is most complete because so many people speak English.
But yes, if you read edit warring page, you know I'm gonna give up on this. Shooting the breeze with you is fine but one has to know when to stop.
Programmer Physicist (talk) 22:27, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll back away from this dead horse if you do. FollowTheSources (talk) 22:44, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Programmer Physicist, before you make any changes from oblast to region, you need broad consensus of editors of Russia (and Ukraine)-related articles. You should start a WP:RFC and involve Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia.
You should also stop accusing others of being obdurate, because right now the problematic editor is you. Guy (help!) 08:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:JzG Did you bother reading my comment just line above your edit?
I think you didn't. So, before you start your personal rant on me I'll reiterate: I gave up on that.
That means more or less that I will not attempt to make any further changes from "oblast" to region.
The same was when you accused me of editing Kaliningrad page - I haven't done a single change there. Per analogiam, I will not be making any changes to the word "oblast", I have stated that at least twice, now it's the third time.
To sum up: no, I did not do any changes to Kaliningrad page, ever. No, I'm not going to change "oblast" to region anymore.
Please, read with comprehension before you drop another comment. If you just wanted to put your two cents in this, that's another story though. However, I'd like to stop this fruitless discussion, because as I said: I gave up on this. Thank you. Programmer Physicist (talk) 09:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Programmer Physicist, yes I did. If you carry on in the current vein you will be blocked for personal attacks and battleground behaviour. Guy (help!) 11:24, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:JzG I'm not attacking anyone. I just would like to politely ask you to let go, since, as I've written it already at least four times, I gave up on this. Why do you continue this discussion? Programmer Physicist (talk) 11:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 June 2020[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: Not moved, WP:SNOW, based on an apparent misunderstanding (non-admin closure) – Thjarkur (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Baltic Sea → Mya Sea – It is both wrong and outdated to call it the Baltic sea when the proper name for it is the Mya Sea as can be seen in the Polish wikipedia for that is the name the sea obtains after it changed its form many years ago and thats how it will remain until a new change comes about, right now the article doesnt even mention this FACT and as such it should be corrected as soon as possible, here is the Polish article for it https://pl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morze_Mya CaptainAugus (talk) 08:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Station1 (talk) 09:22, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The Polish Wikipedia is not an authority, here, on the English Wikipedia. This isn't even a Polish-specific entry. Mya Sea does not even exist as a redirect. It is not the WP:COMMONNAME and the grounds for changing this well-known term to it are beyond spurious. I don't want to be overly hasrh, but the fact that the proposer thought that this would be in any way an uncontroversial request illustrates the level of detachment here. El_C 09:48, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:SNOW.TammbeckTalk 10:00, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose agreeing this is a WP:SNOW. I only found a single mention of "Mya Sea", here, and that is a single use in a book about the Baltic Sea. Seems to be more reference to the stage either below or around the body of water itself, I guess? Definitely not my field, but the term seems obscure in English sources. -2pou (talk) 10:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it is, its the stage the sea is right now, its the Mya Sea and should at least be referred to as such even if you insist on keeping the outdated name of Baltic sea (Which on an unrelated note sounds much worse than Mya Sea) since its really important information, the fact that an entry for it doesnt exist for the english wikipedia does nothing but show how lacking is this wikipedia in knowledge about that sea, also I find it funny that you complain about the uncontroversial request when you were the one to specifically link me to that section CaptainAugus (talk) 11:33, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you speaking to? El_C 11:52, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but hear me out, it sounds way cooler doesnt it? CaptainAugus (talk) 12:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: That's your opinion, I'm arguing based on policy. Henry20090 (talk) 12:04, 4 June 2020 (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.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:17, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Baltic_Sea&oldid=1212510083"