Talk:Anthony of Kiev

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 back. This could have been handled at WP:RMT, so no need to wait the full 7 days. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:31, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony of Kyiv → Anthony of Kiev – Apparently, in the wake of yesterday's change of the modern Kiev page to Kyiv, someone undertook an undiscussed move of this page (among others). I could not reverse it technically, so this is an RM to move it back. There was no consensus in the Kiev/Kyiv discussion on changing historical uses of the term "Kiev" which might render their subjects unrecognizable to readers. St. Anthony of Kiev is one example, a well-known saint, referred to by that name, "Anthony of Kiev" in many English texts. Conversely, I can't find any English references to "Anthony of Kyiv". Until consensus is reached on how to treat historical figures and uses of the term Kiev/Kyiv, these pages should remain where they are (in this case, to "Anthony of Kiev" before the undiscussed move). Walrasiad (talk) 09:45, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. We should follow the name used in reliable sources, not modern political dictates.—Ermenrich (talk) 11:57, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. I sympathise with the argument for consistency, but I disagree with the Kyiv move. And this is an example of why. Kiev/Kyiv is a mere spelling variation. And it has not taken hold nearly strongly enough. It mainly only affects current events, which is why the city should never have been moved. Srnec (talk) 15:38, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose His name is not in reference to historic entity but a city that has been around a long time. blindlynx (talk) 09:12, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose We don’t spell names according to the Google search results popularity contest. There are many other important factors, and that was made painfully clear in the closing summary for the page move of Kiev to Kyiv. This person was the founder of the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra, an important site of religious pilgrimage and history, and the site has a namesake church of St. Anthony and Theodosius and the Caves of St. Anthony in Kyiv. Disassociating him from the place name will only cause confusion. —Michael Z. 20:32, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - this was moved without discussion here and with mention on Talk:Kyiv that we should not be moving historical articles. For the closer, this article should be considered to already be at "Anthony of Kiev" for the purposes of moving, and it will need consensus to change it to Kyiv. With historical articles like British rule in Burma, Burma Railway, and China Burma India Theater, we didn't move things when Burma was changed to Myanmar. Modern things like railways and banks, sure... but not things like this. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:23, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME which is still a Wikipedia policy.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:55, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  And if the outcome of this discussion is no consensus, the article needs to be moved back as it was moved a few days ago without discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I was going to move it back because of no discussion and the fact it was controversial, but the person who moved it added another item after the move so it now has to be moved back by an administrator. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, per WP:COMMONNAME: nGram, where "Anthony of Kyiv" does not register. --K.e.coffman (talk) 14:39, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:14, 24 September 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.