This is an archive of past discussions about Lviv. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Where twice? In section "Theatre and opera" is other photo. --TheLotCarmen (talk) 12:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
It's technically a different picture but it's basically the same. I agree with Vanjagenije here, the images are redundant. Pichpich (talk) 15:25, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
image number oneimage number two
@TheLotCarmen: No. The same photo (File:Лвов Галиција.jpg) was included twice: once in the infobox and once in the "Tourism" section. 1+1=2, so it is twice. Try looking better before you revert other editor's edit. Vanjagenije(talk) 15:28, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
I live in Lviv and believe me: it's two different most popular places in city. It will be better to include them both at header infobox. Look on Ukrainian Wikipedia where this article is "featured". --TheLotCarmen (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
If no more remarks then I change. --TheLotCarmen (talk) 13:18, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Just to make sure we are talking about the same two images, here they are. Clearly, they are of the same building. Including both in the article is unnecessary. Pichpich (talk) 22:15, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Lviv. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
There were four "official" names of Lviv during its history used in English: Lviv, Lwów, Lvov and Lemberg. Leopolis was oftenly used but never "official". All of them are still in use by respective languages (Polish, Russian, German and Spanish). What is the reason to distinguish the Polish name of the city in the infobox ignoring the others? --Dƶoxar (talk) 20:36, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
The infobox on cities is not the space for every name ever used in any language for a city. It is the space for the current name and significant other recent or current names. Lviv's Ukrainian name belongs there, of course. But since there is now and has been a significant Polish population and presence Lwów is also appropriate. This has been the case by a long-standing consensus. If you want to add a half dozen other names then I object and you will have to build a new consensus for such an unprecedented expansion of infobox names. --Taivo (talk) 21:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Sure, Polish people and language have made a great influence on Lviv. But the city was a part of Austria for around 140 years, during whole 19th century. Most of pre-war buildings in Lviv were built in that Austrian period, some of great German-speaking personalities were born or lived in the city. All of them used the name Lemberg (and it was in active use till 1944).
The names "Leopolis" and "Lemberg" are still widely used not only in Spanish (not to mention Latin) and German, they are important terms in modern culture, Ukrainians frequently use them as "poetic" equivalents of the name "Lviv". There is also a great amount of Latin inscriptions in Lviv.
Concerning your argument there's very small Polish population in modern Lviv (0,9% according to the 2001 Census), so the city's Polish name is the same historical as Lemberg or Leopolis (whose importance was explained in the previous point).
There are also Serbian, Romanian, Crimean Tatar and many other names for the city, so these two are not even close to "half dozen other names".
So, in my opinion, Latin and German names deserve to be mentioned in the Infobox. This is not in a conflict with the Consensus.--Dƶoxar (talk) 22:33, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it is a conflict with the consensus, which has been to include Lwów and no others. Spanish? Are you serious? When did the Spanish control western Ukraine? How big was the Spanish influence on Ukraine. Get real. The Poles controlled Lviv for centuries, not just a few decades. And it was not "Austrian" until 1944, it was Polish. You're going to have to build a new consensus for any alternate names beyond Lwów. And you completely ignore the point of the infobox, which is not to include a laundry list of every name that a city has been called throughout its history including "Spanish". It is to include only the most significant alternate names and that is here, by consensus, Lwów only. --Taivo (talk) 23:08, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Did you read my text carefully? "Leopolis" is a Latin name, not Spanish, I just noticed that Spanish uses it as well. Also from 1772 to 1918 Lviv was known in English as Lemberg, the capital of Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria, part of the Austrian Empire, in 1941-44 it was controlled by Germany under the same name. Lemberg and Leopolis are significant names of Lviv, read once more please:
The city was a part of Austria for around 140 years, during whole 19th century. Most of pre-war buildings in Lviv were built in that Austrian period, some of great German-speaking personalities were born or lived in the city. All of them used the name Lemberg.
The names "Leopolis" and "Lemberg" are important terms in modern culture, Ukrainians frequently use them as "poetic" equivalents of the name "Lviv", and they are used in other languages (e.g. German, French, Italian, Spanish)
There's very small Polish population in modern Lviv (0,9% according to the 2001 Census), so the city's Polish name is the same historical as Lemberg or Leopolis.--Dƶoxar (talk) 00:50, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
I read what you wrote, but that doesn't mean that you've convinced me of anything. You still don't get my point--the infobox isn't the place for a complete compendium of every name that a city has ever borne. The first couple of sentences of the lead paragraph serve that function. The most common recent names for Lviv are Lviv and Lwów. If you want to change it, then you have to build a new consensus. That means convincing the other interested editors of your point. I'm not convinced that these historical names should be in the infobox. --Taivo (talk) 02:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
I've got your point. But I don't see arguments why, for instance, Lemberg isn't important enought. Or, if we talk about recent names, why not Lvov? Also, why this Consenus doesn't work with Polish cities? (e.g. Przemyśl, Chełm) Where can I find the text of the Consensus? --Dƶoxar (talk) 12:33, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Read WP:OTHERSTUFF to understand why we're talking about Lviv and Lviv only. --Taivo (talk) 12:42, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
I've explained why not "Lemberg" already. --Taivo (talk) 12:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
The closest you can get to quoting relevant Wikipedia policy regarding the name of the city is in the template below. Please read the long discussion linked inside that template, including "Talk:Gdansk/Vote" and "Talk:Gdansk/Vote/discussion". There has never been a similar discussion about Lviv (Lwów). It's unfortunate, but our naming policy has no other precedence, Poeticbenttalk 22:37, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
This page is affected by the Gdańsk (Danzig) Vote. The following rules apply in the case of disputes:
For Gdańsk, use the name Danzig between 1308 and 1945
For Gdańsk, use the name Gdańsk before 1308 and after 1945
In biographies of clearly German persons, the name should be used in the form Danzig (Gdańsk) and later Danzig exclusively
In biographies of clearly Polish persons, the name should be used in the form Gdańsk (Danzig) and later Gdańsk exclusively.
For Gdansk and other locations that share a history between Germany and Poland, the first reference of one name in an article should also include a reference to other names, e.g. Danzig (now Gdańsk, Poland) or Gdańsk (Danzig). An English language reference that primarily uses this name should be provided on the talk page if a dispute arises.
Reverts to conform with community consensus are excluded from the three-revert rule (3RR). Only the place names can be reverted exempt from the 3RR according to the outcome of this vote, additional changes fall again under the 3RR. Please use descriptive edit summaries.
The detailed vote results and the vote itself can be found on Talk:Gdansk/Vote. This vote has ended; please do not vote anymore. Comments and discussions can be added to Talk:Gdansk/Vote/discussion anytime. This template {{Gdansk-Vote-Notice}} can be added on the talk page of affected articles if necessary.
Lwów in 1934: with 198,212 Poles, 75,316 Jews, and 24,245 Ukrainians.
I think Poeticbent makes a good point. The Gdansk issue was protracted and hairy (and I was only observing it!), and having to go through a 'take 2' version isn't worth our energy. It's also a bit of a 'house of cards' issue. If a new ruling is made for this article, it's going to open up the sluice gates for renewed POV pushing on Gdansk. I'm not going to invoke any policies or guidelines other than WP:COMMONSENSE. We have a precedent, so let's use it instead of pushing boulders uphill. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:11, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
The Gdansk decision was about an article's title and about how to refer to the city within the text of the article. Since "Danzig" is not listed in the infobox, it can be inferred that the infobox should only contain the name as in the article's title, thus, "Lwów" should be deleted from the infobox. I don't have a problem with that if it is your (User:Iryna Harpy and User:Poeticbent) understanding of the Gdansk decision. --Taivo (talk) 01:14, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Right now, the only problem I see, is with the article bodytext. If we choose to apply the Gdansk vote here, we also must follow it throughout. For example, in the history section, when the city was part of Poland in the course of several centuries (see table), it was known only as Lwów, not Lviv (nor Lvov). The city was never part of the Russian Empire in its history. This needs to be changed; the name Lwów is not being used in bodytex righ now. Most Poles were expelled from Lwów in 1945-46. Thanks, Poeticbenttalk 16:00, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
That would be following the usage of historical names within the body of the article for the historical sections... which makes sense to me. I know there are a lot of articles on Wikipedia that don't conform with this, but they're usually the ones which are POV-pushed, or have little activity and watchers. I think that it would make a pleasant change to be able to introduce a transparent style for readers without edit warring and protracted discussion. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:10, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I'm new to Wikipedia so I might be wrong about it, but it seems like the general population number indicated in the box is not correct. Can someone check it? According to the City Population,in 2016 Lviv reached a number of 758,375. Thank you! --0riK (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
If You will click at "listen" button for Ukrainian sounding of the name Lviv you will hear something like "L'vil".... Nobody in Ukraine is talking like that. It should sound like L'viw (In Ukrainian language we use one letter (Вв) for both "V" and "W" sounds, but with "V" at the beginning of syllable and "W" sound for an endings of syllable). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.44.30.11 (talk) 13:24, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Lviv. 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.
I have just modified 3 external links on Lviv. 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.
"Ethnicity in Lviv according to censuses of 1989 and 2001 respectively"
and the one below duplicates the population data in the tables above.
-> Let us merge them.
Zezen (talk) 13:26, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Lviv. 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.
Many people who read Wikipedia also read books. Books in English that mention the city use different names depending on when they were published. Older books are readily available, either second-hand, or as reprints, or as scanned books. During the 20th Century, books in English that referred to the city used either Lemberg, Lwow or Lvov. More recently people have published (or republished) English-language books with copies of World War II maps with the spellings of place names in the Russian language (in Cyrillic script).
Wikipedia is an online encyclopaedia. Readers need to know the spelling of the city used by the books and newspaper articles they read. It is essential that the first lines of the lede give the names of the city that readers are likely to encounter in currently available books.-- Toddy1(talk) 11:23, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
The words "little remains of Polish culture in Lviv except for the Italian influenced architecture" were added by 86.148.64.212
at 12:17, 2 June 2008 in this edit. The edit provided a citation.
I have restored the cited text, and added a citation template for the cited source.-- Toddy1(talk) 08:17, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
In History section, subheading Kingdom of Poland, paragraph about 17th century "captured the High Castle, murdering the defenders". For impartial standards of history, this should be "slaughtered" or "executed", unless surrendered garrisons were killed after terms of safe passage.
Standard practice upto the 16th century expected surrender when the walls were breached, convention held any last stand "fight to the death" to be fair targets.
Murder of defendants, in modern and contemporary terms, carries a judgement value, frequently used in propaganda (an image deployed in nationalist call to arms in 18th and 19th centuries, an era of much more unrestricted "total war").
Unless there is a specific circumstance (betrayal of terms, contemporaneous outrage) the death of the High Castle garrison should use more impartial language —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.28.175.74 (talk) 16:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
"The Latin phrase Semper fidelis (Always True) was used as a motto on the former coat of arms of 1936–1939, but was no longer used after the Second World War." World War II ended in 1945, so the obvious question is, what was it during the war? "Arbeit macht frei", perhaps? 184.147.89.192 (talk) 15:14, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
The first sentence of this article began, as of before my edit today:
The use of foreign language names in the lede is as per WP:LEADLANG, which says that this is for a single foreign language equivalent name. The sentence quoted above has four separate foreign language names - obviously far more than one name. The disadvantage of having so many names is that it clutters the lead sentence and impairs readability. Even on my laptop monitor, the second word of the first sentence in this version of the article doesn't appear until well into the second line of the sentence.
We do have a naming section in this article, which is a perfectly suitable place for this information. Kahastoktalk 10:00, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Lvov is not a foreign language name. It was the most commonly used name in English for the city now increasingly known as Lviv until the beginning of the 21st century. This is a different matter than the various names Lviv is known in other languages. As such, it merits being mentioned in the lead, especially because I still see Lvov used (although less so after the incidents of earlier this year). Denali and Kolkata also include their alternate names in the lead. Not sure why Lviv/Lvov ought to be different. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 04:50, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
It was, as well as Lemberg was more common before it. Now both are used only in historical context (unlike e.g. Kiev which is still a widely used alternative to Kyiv). Both of your sources prove historical context of this version.--Dƶoxar (talk) 07:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Lvov is at least as widely used as an alternative as Kiev is, although such usage has probably sharply decreased in the last few months. Even if it is "historical", that is still no need to banish the alternate name from the lead, as the above articles referenced make clear. Again, I'm not sure why Lviv/Lvov is the exception. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:33, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Google still gives a lot of recent results for "Lvov"Marcelus (talk) 09:26, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
The city is Lvov in English language and basically all other languages in the world but Ukranian. Please stop rewriting history for the sake of ukrainian current struggle. ITS CONFUSING. If everybody did this in time of war, we would just have CHAOS and nothing else. 21:19, 9 July 2022 (CET)
Lviv, (Polish: Lwów, German: Lemberg, Russian: Lvov) city in western Ukraine ... GizzyCatBella🍁 20:23, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Could you cite some policy support for that please? Because it's different from what we do on every other article on Wikipedia. Kahastoktalk 20:36, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
@Kahastok your proposal is actually almost correct as per WP:LEADLANG. I would drop .. or Lvov.. and replace it with Russian: Lvov. - GizzyCatBella🍁 00:51, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Which would be problematic because (a) Lvov is not the Russian name of the city (that's Львов) and (b) we don't format foreign-language names like that, per WP:LEADLANG and MOS:BOLDALTNAMES.
If we are saying that Lvov is an English word that is "significant" enough to be included, it should be in the lead. If not, it should be left to the other names section, along with Lwów and Lemberg and all the rest. Kahastoktalk 16:48, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Please provide multiple high-quality sources demonstrating that - contrary to every indication for hundreds of years - the Latin script is in fact the primary script used for writing Russian text. Kahastoktalk 17:14, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Please provide multiple high-quality sources that this is wrong... 🙂 (Just joking, you are confused my friend) - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:21, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
None of these suggest that Russian is normally written in the Latin script. None of these suggest that the Russian name of the city is "Lvov" and not "Львов", as you want the article to claim. No, I'm not confused. You want the article to say something daft, and you want it to do it in a format that goes explicitly against the MOS. Kahastoktalk 17:32, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
@Kahastok - Lvov is used in English as translation from the Russian Львов to sound the same and it has been used until 1991. That’s why possibly is being constantly removed due to the political situation right now. In Ukrainian is Lviv or in Cyrillic UkrainianЛьвів .
Do you see the difference? GizzyCatBella🍁 17:41, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Your proposal was literally to say, Russian: Lvov. Not, Russian: Львов or Russian: Львов (Lvov). Not Львов. It was Russian: Lvov.
Now, do you understand that when you say, Russian: Lvov, you are saying that the Russian name is Lvov? Not Львов. Not Львов. Just Lvov.
Now my point is this. The use of Lvov in the lead in this version is as an English name. Since you seem to feel the need to emphasise words like this, I'll emphasise this for you. The purpose of including Lvov is as an English name. Not a Russian name. Not a German name. Not a Hungarian name. Not a Polish name. An English name. If the only purpose of giving the word Lvov in the lead is to give the Russian name, then (1) you've failed, because the Russian name is actually Львов, and (2) the place for that is the naming section further down the article. Kahastoktalk 17:55, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
@KahastokThats why you were just reverted here. It appears that the user (they didn’t left edit summary) does not like Lvov because it’s a Russian name of the city. You see Lvov as an English name but others see it as Russian name (because it is - just in a Latin spelling). With a current war going on... good luck to you. - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:02, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
@Kahastok by the way, I support your edit, but please understand the environment and why you are being reverted. I’m not partaking in editing at the moment due to my respect for the fighting Ukrainians (this might be affecting neutrality), but I believe you are right. Lviv was known as Lvov in the English world, and that should be reflected in the lead. - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:11, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
@Kahastok You can see here - the same user who just removed Lvov from the lede by reverting you keeps removing anything Russian from the multiple articles , , , , , , etc, etc. like a Kalashnikov rifle 😀 - Do you understand now why (possibly) they removed Lvov as well from this article? - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
You have pinged my nine times on this page now today, eight of them in the past two hours. Please stop.
My edit reverted the addition of inaccurate text that breaks our formatting guidelines. It has not been reverted.
I really don't care whether Lvov goes into the lead as an English word or not. I do object to our inaccurately claiming that Russian words are written in Latin script as opposed to Cyrillic script. I also object to adding text that breaks our formatting rules for no good reason, and I object to including a vast list of foreign-language names in the first sentence. Kahastoktalk 19:00, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
In all my life, I have never heard of Lviv referred to Lvov in English, except in Soviet era publications or data sources. There is in my opinion some kind of misguided manipulation going on here to add the Russian name. Ask yourself, why would someone care to rename a city to a foreign name? Repeating a lie that Lvov is an English name over and over does not make it true. 2A01:E0A:9D5:AA20:B58A:B1EA:2ADC:1D25 (talk) 20:13, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
You miss the point, I find. If it is not an English word, then it does not belong in the lead sentence. If it is in the lead sentence, it is there because it is an English word, irrespective of where it might have come from etymologically. We need to find a consensus on this point, and accusing people of lying is not going to get us one.
And to address the point Ask yourself, why would someone care to rename a city to a foreign name?. There are an enormous number of cities throughout the world whose English names are different from their local names. Why? Any number of reasons. And in the vast majority of cases this is not controversial. Kahastoktalk 20:32, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Good point. Looking at where Lvov is used in recent times in English, I see that Lvov had been used by publications from a certain ethnic group which has been propagandized by Russia over the centuries to hate Ukrainians. I mean no disrespect to them and out of my love for them I will not mention who they are. Basically this ethic group had terrible things done to them, by people of many nationalities including Ukrainians, but false and strong Russian propaganda, over 100 years worth, made the Ukrainians out to be far worse then they were (key to Russia's longtime aim to annihilate Ukrainians). As a result of that they developed anti-Ukrainian sentiment and used the word Lvov in English as a way, I believe, to spite Ukrainians. People, let's please put these battles behind us and not bow to the small portions of our populations that are extremists, especially given that the use of Lvov in English may be linked to sad propaganda, misunderstanding and anti-Ukrainaianism. The relationship between Ukraine and this ethnic group should not be an issue, in fact they should be best buddies. 2A01:E0A:9D5:AA20:2CD1:829A:2463:97A7 (talk) 10:50, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
@ Kahastok (no ping) If you don’t care then stop insisting on Lvov being there and move on. - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:25, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
At no stage anywhere in this discussion have I ever insisted on Lvov being there. I've left it there sometimes, when removing other names from the lead, but I have never objected to people removing it. Kahastoktalk 20:34, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
This is going nowhere. I will start an RFC with the aim to attain consensus on the Lvov question. Kahastoktalk 20:38, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Should Lvov be included as an alternative English-language name in the first sentence of this article? Are there any other names that should also be included? Kahastoktalk 20:40, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
@Redrose64 🙂 correct - that was during the Austro-Hungarian days, hence the German name. Then back to Polish again - Lwów, then Russian - Lvov, then Ukrainian - Lviv 🙂. What’s next? Hopefully that’s it. - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:34, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Yes (first question). Here's the Ngram result: (don't be misled by "Lemberg", most of the attestations are of the family name Lemberg). 2019 isn't too long ago, so "Lvov" is still relevant as an alternative English-language name, even if it might eventually fall out of use in the decades to come. Second question: no, although I'm not happy with this deletion. Obviously, we have to get rid of lede clutter, but the standard solution is to put relevant (but distracting) details into a note. –Austronesier (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
I think "Lwów" is the Polish spelling (referring to Ngram result where it is "Lwow"). Mellk (talk) 00:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
@Mellk: Thank you pointing this out. Polish diacritics have long been "ignored" in English-language sources (mostly due to type-setting restrictions, I guess), but things indeed have changed,. Here's the amended plot. –Austronesier (talk) 09:46, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
No. I barely see Lvov used anymore, at least in American media. Maybe just in fringe "communist" (in reality, Russia-friendly) media. Cononsense (talk) 02:58, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
No. Most uses are historical. In recent times, Lvov is not used in English-language media. SuperΨDro 14:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Yes. Common historical name for this location. Andre🚐 02:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
I am leaning towards yes. "Kiev" may be uncommon to find in English-language media now (referring to the modern city), but that does not mean it should be removed from the lead for Kyiv article because it is still a significant alternative name (of course some may argue it should be removed but simply because WP:IDONTLIKEIT). "Lvov" seems to be the same, and the Ngram shows this. Mellk (talk) 18:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Yes, historical and commonly used alternative variant of the name.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
No. "Lvov" was never a local name (it was the soviet oppressors' name given to it by its masters in moscow). It hasn't been used for years. No other name should even be considered. Lwów predates Lvov and Lemberg is positively ancient. I've been to Lviv many times and while you can actually see Polish culture and history in the town, there's nary a drop of russian or Soviet. If one more name must be added, Lwów has a MUCH stronger pedigree than Lvov. --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 00:24, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
The never was a local name (whatever that means) is irrelevant. If "Lvov" is significantly used in English literature, as shown in the Ngram, it should be included as an alternative name per WP:PLACE and WP:OTHERNAMES. Also "Lvov" is not a Soviet invention. This comment does not give any policy-based reasons. Mellk (talk) 00:46, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Neither do most of the other opinions here;) --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 00:56, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Digression
Regardless of what we want to include in this monstrous string of historical names, it is obvious that its length separates the subject from the predicate in a way that does bad service to our readers. Again: can't we just boldly pack it into an efn-note as a first measure, which is best practice in WP in such instances? –Austronesier (talk) 21:23, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Totally agree. All these historical names should be in the "Names" section to remove the clutter in the first sentence. --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 01:17, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Per WP:LEADLANG, only ONE foreign name may be in the first sentence. The rest (or all) of them can be placed in a separate "Names" section. Do not continue to place all the foreign name and pronunciation clutter in the first sentence because it makes it utterly impossible to read. Follow Wikipedia guidelines and keep the clutter in the "Names" section. TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 01:23, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Note that this is a separate issue from whether or not to say "or Lvov" in the first sentence. --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 01:24, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Me personally, I don't find this too bad because I've seen plenty of other city articles written similarly. Plenty of places have multiple official languages (although it's not the case here) Plus, including the Russian name makes a reader understand why some sources (still) refer to the city as Lvov. For anybody wondering what's going on, we are talking about this revision. --Synotia (talk) 18:22, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I agree with this and have tried to fix it before. Trouble is, someone then adds Ukrainian, and then someone else adds Russian, and then someone else adds Polish, and a few weeks later you're back to six or seven languages there again.
I don't object to including the Ukrainian, but I think anything else - including the Russian, even if consensus is reached that Lvov is a modern English word - should be removed from the lead and put in an appropriate section in the article body. Kahastoktalk 18:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
WP:LEADLANG allows for the optional inclusion of one foreign name in the lead (without pronunciation information which can be found in the "Names" section), which, in this case, would be Ukrainian (since that is the language of the article's title name). But the original sentence of this article began "Lviv ... is...", but "Lviv" and "is" were separated by a whole line and a half of foreign words, phonetic pronunciations, etc. A line and a half is FAR too much needless detail to insert between the first word and the second word of the first sentence of anything whatsoever. (And other articles are slowly being edited to conform to this standard. I don't doubt that there are many that still adhere to the older habit of including lines and lines of fine detail between the first and second words of the first sentence.) --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 19:31, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The pronunciation of "Lviv" should also be in the "Names" section as at Kyiv and Odesa. It is nonsense to include both IPA and "fake English" between the first and second words of the first sentence. Even English-speaking people who don't know the "correct pronunciation" will come up with [ləviv] as a close approximation based on the spelling. With a name like Łódź (Poland), a simple pronunciation in IPA might be necessary because no English reader will come up by accident with [wudʒ], but that's not the case here. --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 19:38, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I just looked up the article on Łódź and was surprised that there isn't a single pronunciation in that article that I could see. There certainly is no pronunciation in the lead and there's surprisingly not even one in the "Names" section. So there's no justification based on that article, where a pronunciation would actually be helpful, for including one in the first sentence here. --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 19:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I present to you Szczecin. Interesting to note: When you hover over it, the clutter between the name and next word is hidden. Synotia (talk) 20:05, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Similar situation in what regard? Synotia (talk) 20:10, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
@Synotia Known historically in multiple languages - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:14, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
@TaivoLinguist - Łódź was basically consistently in one country (even during partitions was regarded Polish, same for Warsaw or Cracow for example) unlike Lviv that was very multicultural and switched countries over the years. Therefore names in numerous tongues for Lviv. - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:07, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
See Wrocław, same, or Grodno. Don’t be afraid to add alternative names cities are known for (historically), this helps readers. - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:12, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Given that what you are arguing goes directly against WP:LEADLANG, what policy or guideline are you basing this off? Kahastoktalk 20:14, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
You. WP:LEADLANG says maximum one foreign language. You seem to be proposing we include six. What is your policy basis for this? Kahastoktalk 20:37, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
No, I don’t. I simply demonstrated to you that multiple articles have that structure (for years) and explained why. - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Note - this page is most likely also affected by the Gdańsk Vote, please keep it in mind. - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:29, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
And if there's good reason to use multiple English language names we should use them as appropriate. Nothing in the Gdansk vote outcome requires that we include half a dozen non-English names in the first sentence. Kahastoktalk 20:37, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Now that we have an entire section dedicated to names only 🤷♀️ how about mopping the duplicates, eh? - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:40, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
French was commonly spoken among the aristocracy; the first periodicals published in Lviv were in French. The Yiddish one is arguably more clutter, as it just says Lemberg in Hebrew script. Synotia (talk) 21:29, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
French was commonly spoken among the aristocracy - Oh please, that’s not a reason to add French. Esperanto too? 🙂 - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
You seem willfully unaware of just how important the French language used to be throughout Europe and its prominence in historical sources. Particularly in the case of Lviv; like I said, its first periodicals were published in French in the 18th century. Synotia (talk) 08:13, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
There are no grounds for inclusion. There is no connection to France whatsoever. - GizzyCatBella🍁 08:56, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Well you seem to really hate French. I allowed myself to add the Latin name as it is also a prominent language in older sources, and that it is the root for many of the foreign names for Lviv, including the oh-so-hated Léopol. Synotia (talk) 09:07, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
@SynotiaWell you seem to really hate French. -->()- be careful with such comments going forward. - GizzyCatBella🍁 09:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Łódź is nice, since it uses a footnote as I have repeatedly suggested. And no, per MOS:LEADCLUTTER it is not a good thing to open an article with "the Earth (jldhsfjklsdhflksdfjlshkdfjhklsdjfhskljdfhksjdfhksjdfhkjshdfjkshdfkjhsdkjfhskdjfhksjdhf) is round”. Btw, I will unwatch this page. –Austronesier (talk) 20:18, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
This discussion kind of got a tiny bit off the rails. I don't really mind how many alternate names are listed for a place (although the list in the "Names" section is truly excessive in the prose paragraph). What I care about here is keeping the first sentence free of clutter. Austronesier, the footnote at Łódź is so unobtrusive that I hadn't even noticed it :p --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 21:54, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
@TaivoLinguist - Looks good now, but duplicates and nonsense (Greek, Tatar, French.. etc. (Japanese, Chinese too if there 🙂 I stopped looking after Italian 🤦🏻♀️) needs to be cleared. Leave Polish, Russian, German and Yiddish, historical languages of Lviv. - GizzyCatBella🍁 22:55, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I really don't see where the problem was, given that it is in a separate section. Synotia (talk) 08:19, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
The problem is that Wikipedia is not a gazetteer of every name in the world that Lviv is known as. It should include historic references that have been used, but the translation of "Lviv" into Swahili or Tagalog is utterly irrelevant to understanding the history of the town. German, Polish, russian, and Yiddish are all appropriate terms to mention in the article since they represent the historic languages in and in control of the city, but Armenian is utterly irrelevant--it's just linguistic trivia of the highest order. --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 12:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
@Synotia Where did you get this from -->? GizzyCatBella🍁 14:20, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Are you familiar with the concept of cultural assimilation of minorities into the dominant culture?
This was common throughout the USSR; when you had a parent of one ethnicity and a parent of another you could choose which one would show on your identity documents. People with one Jewish parent would typically pick the other ethnicity to escape discrimination. This was also quite common among Poles; for you I managed to find a reference in this article. (ctrl+F "declared" and you will find a reference).
And why did you remove the paragraph about Lviv being less Russified? There is one reference, although I've been told it's a somewhat weak one. This stuff is super basic knowledge in Ukraine btw.
@Synotia second source provided by you now also doesn’t support your edit (see bold green below and explain please) - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
1 - @Synotia Read WP:OR. Again (to start with) - Please state what reference you used to arrive with this --> ..and their descendants would not self-identify as Poles in censuses. (with a page number). - GizzyCatBella🍁 16:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
2 - Then please explainthis edit of yours. How did you arrive at this:
Having been administered by the Austrian Empire, and subsequently by Poland, the city did not undergo as major Russification as other large cities in Ukraine, and as a result Lviv has been the most important centre of Ukrainian-language for a long time. Lviv was also the main centre of the Ukrainian independence movement in the late Soviet era.
"In September 1939, as a result of collusion between Stalin and Nazi Germany, Lviv became a part of the Soviet empire.
Unification of the Ukrainian people in a single state and partial Ukrainization of education and culture was outweighed by mass totalitarian repressions against the Western Ukrainians unseen before in history. Tens of thousands of people from Halychyna [= Galicia in Ukrainian] were sent to concentration camps and exiled to Siberia.
Resistance of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army against the Soviet regime lasted until late 50s. In 60s and 70s Lviv became the scene of several widely known trials of dissidents – Vyatcheslav Chornovil, Bohdan Horyn, Ivan Hel, Iryna and Ihor Kalynets. They all contributed to Ukraine eventually gaining independence."
You read here about UPA activity and all this – the UPA was active in areas formerly under Polish control, and their activity/legacy carried on into the Soviet era. Moreover, as linked in the Russification in Ukraine article, the process happened under the Russian Empire (which Lviv was never a part of) and later under the Soviet Union. No Russification process happened in areas not under Russian control (feels strange I have to explain this!!!)
And it was more extensive under the Russian Empire than under the USSR, and even then it was not as bad as in Kyiv for example; where there were few Ukrainian-language schools in the Soviet era. You will find all this stuff in the article.
And about the Poland thing – I don't own that particular Polish book, if that's what you mean. But what happened is typical assimilation really, this happened with Poles throughout the USSR. I found another source mentioned here for you: Poles in Ukraine. Entry: Encyclopedia of Ukraine, pp. 86–94 Toronto: Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Toronto PressSynotia (talk) 17:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
None of the above supports --> "Having been administered by the Austrian Empire, and subsequently by Poland, the city did not undergo as major Russification as other large cities in Ukraine, and as a result"
The Austrian Empire is not even mentioned in the above wall of text posted by you. - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:57, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Synotia You can’t enter unreferenced material (and then edit war over it) on the bases you have read about somewhere or because it’s a common knowledge in Ukraine. - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
The wall of text was to illustrate the resistance against Russification in the area. The source is there primarily for Lviv has been the most important centre of Ukrainian-language for a long time. Lviv was also the main centre of the Ukrainian independence movement in the late Soviet era.
And honestly, everything you need is in the articles about Russification in Ukraine, Russian language in Ukraine etc etc. You seem to not understand that the less a country has been ruled over by the Russians, the less time they have had to Russify it. Synotia (talk) 18:15, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
I understand, but the point is that you enter unreferenced data (WP:OR) and then you edit war over it to keep it. Please don’t do that. - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:20, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Glad to hear that. Sure, in the future I'll press the talk page button before the Undo button;) Synotia (talk) 18:22, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Now I see by what you mean with "as a result" – Lviv is the most important academic/economic centre in the less Russified part of Ukraine. The names mentioned in the wall of text and countless other nationalist figures are associated with the city. Kyiv is much more influenced by Russian culture on the other hand. Do you understand now? --Synotia (talk) 18:20, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Do you mind properly reference or modify this and move it from the lead to the body of the article where it belongs? - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:23, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Why did you remove the Leopolitan bit now? Are you gonna ask for a source for that too? Synotia (talk) 15:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
These two seem to clash on this article, with the template's content overwriting the coordinates.
Could likely be fixed by limiting max-width for the template. 2A04:4540:6516:900:308E:4E24:BE85:707A (talk) 03:46, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
The reference to "other names" can be done in one of two ways. One way is constructive and non-confrontational. The other way is in your face. At Kyiv there is a simple footnote that directs the reader to other names used for the city and the history of the city's names. All the reader confronts is a simple superscripted footnote letter. At Lviv certain editors want to put up a billboard with a statement in text that "there are other names". The former is preferable in Wikipedia for two reasons. First, alternate names are not the point of the article and should not be highlighted as if they are more important than the fact that X city is the seat of X oblast, etc. Second, Wikipedia names articles based on the most common form used in English. That form should be highlighted to the exclusion of any other forms for the sake of readability and reducing confusion. All other forms of name, historical and otherwise, should be relegated to the Names section where they can be discussed thoroughly and fairly. Highlighting the fact that "Lviv isn't the only name" before saying anything else about Lviv is unfair to the rest of the content in the lead that is far more important than the fact that Poles and Russian don't like to call the place "Lviv". TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 00:42, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Typically, we try to maintain consistency within particular areas. Sea of Japan is irrelevant to the issues surrounding placenames in Ukraine. Different languages, different histories, different political pressures. Kyiv is far more relevant to Lviv than the Sea of Japan. The chances of a reader jumping from Lviv to Sea of Japan are zero, but the chances of jumping from Lviv to Kyiv or Odesa or Rivne are quite high. Other options include the way the matter is handled at Odesa where there isn't even a reference to the Names section. As at Kyiv, the 30-byte critique is invalid. --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 11:54, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm here to propose the same type of change as for the Kyiv page. The ensemble of the historic centre was inscribed to the list of world heritage in danger:
In September 2023, the UNESCOWorld Heritage Committee added the ensemble of the historic centre of Lviv to the List of World Heritage in Danger.1 The Committee considered that «optimal conditions are no longer met to fully guarantee the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property and that it is threatened by potential danger due to the war».2 The aim is to deter Russian bombing and mobilize international support for the conservation of the sites.3
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
