User talk:GiantSnowman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has been editing Wikipedia for at least ten years.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Consistency in Stadium Naming Conventions

Dear GiantSnowman, in connection with your response on Talk:Father Władysław Augustynek Stadium, I encourage you to take a broader view and consider the consistency of stadium naming conventions. I believe that your goal is dialogue and that anyone can change their mind—there’s no shame in that. However, if this perspective isn’t reconsidered, we risk ending up with some stadiums named Stadion Miejski (Gdynia) (since we don’t translate names into English on our own) while others are named Tychy Municipal Stadium (because we do translate names on our own). Wouldn’t it be better to apply a uniform approach? If we agree that consistency is key, then of course, a uniform approach is the best solution. I’d like to encourage you to support moving the following articles accordingly:

I’d appreciate your thoughts on this! Paradygmaty (talk) 08:46, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Making so many nominations in a short time is disruptive. GiantSnowman 18:05, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dialogue

@GiantSnowman, I engaged in User_talk:GiantSnowman#Consistency_in_Stadium_Naming_Conventions with the genuine intention of working towards a consistent naming convention for Polish stadiums. I don’t understand the tone you’ve taken in this discussion (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Paradygmaty), as my goal was to clarify the issue, not create conflict. If you’re open to dialogue, I’d be happy to explain my perspective—but if not, I apologize for any frustration I may have caused and won’t bother you further, though I must admit I’m disappointed by how this played out. Paradygmaty (talk) 15:37, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to establish a standard, then start a central discussion first, rather than a bunch of disruptive RMs. GiantSnowman 18:37, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough @GiantSnowman - how would you recommend starting a central discussion in a way that ensures clarity and avoids unnecessary confusion? I’m open to suggestions on the best venue and approach. If you have a preferred way to structure this discussion, I’d be happy to follow that to keep things productive. Paradygmaty (talk) 17:09, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Start a discussion at WT:FOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 18:12, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. I’ll start a discussion there. Just to make sure we’re aligned - are there any specific points you think should be covered from the outset to make the conversation more effective? Paradygmaty (talk) 18:20, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Make your case clearly and concisely and supported by evidence/sources. GiantSnowman 18:24, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The core issue is that we currently have a mix of Polish and English names - some remain in Polish due to a lack of established English usage (Stadion Miejski (Białystok), while others are translated because the guideline suggests non-official names should be localized (Kielce Municipal Stadium). This inconsistency creates confusion. Would you suggest advocating for full translation into English, full retention of Polish names, or another approach? I’d like to frame the discussion in a way that leads to a clear and applicable outcome. Paradygmaty (talk) 18:28, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey mate, I've continually run into a rotating group of IPs—very obviously controlled by the same person—who insistently link foreign-language articles for players in rosters who don't have an English article. I have seen random discussions about this before, but I can't seem to find any of them when I look back at WP:FOOTY. From my understanding, and based on almost universal practice across just about every football-related article, the consensus is that we do not link foreign-language articles unless there is a clear, demonstrable reason for it. These IPs—as evidenced at FK Partizan and FK TSC most recently—continue to revert my corrections without any explanation. Can you clarify the consensus or at least give me your take on linking foreign-language Wiki articles? I appreciate your help and guidance. Anwegmann (talk) 21:23, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not common but I don't see a huge issue with it. See MOS:UL - "If an article exists on a non-English language Wikipedia but not yet in English, consider a red link that also links to the non-English language article". GiantSnowman 21:53, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that's good to see. I've been trying to guide them toward WP:ILL, which says the same thing and shows how to do that. They don't seem to be very interested in following that guidance, but I will continue to give it a go. Thanks for the help! Anwegmann (talk) 22:07, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Edits like this are disruptive - the point of the interlanguage link is to keep a red link here for article creation, but what they are doing does not allow that. If they continue with disruptive edits like that, then we will need to block. GiantSnowman 22:10, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is exactly what they, through a rotating series of IPs, have been doing insistently. Anwegmann (talk) 22:13, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GiantSnowman&oldid=1280318665"