This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Composers, a group of editors writing and developing biographical articles about composers of all eras and styles. The project discussion page is the place to talk about technical and editorial issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!ComposersWikipedia:WikiProject ComposersTemplate:WikiProject ComposersComposers articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Any explanation for the recent move? I don't object on principle, but I think it is generally good to mention a move before doing it. In English language scholarship Radomski prevails over z Radomia. Thanks! -- Michael Scott Cuthbert(talk) 21:31, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
Pinging @In ictu oculi: who made the move. I've been writing a lot on Mikołaj/Nicolaus recently and I don't think I've ever seen this spelling in an English text. It's not in Grove. Pinging interested folks @Karol Langner: (started page), @Piotrus:, @PWM Edition:, and @Antandrus:. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert(talk) 18:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
Back in 2014 I was thinking along the lines of how the composer is listed in recordings catalogues, but you will find the Polish "z Radomia" (of Radom) rather than Radomski in sources such as:
New Oxford History of Music: Ars Nova and the Renaissance ed. Anselm Hughes, Gerald Abraham - 1960 "Netherland polyphony found its way very early into Poland; contrapuntal writing was practised early in the fifteenth century by Mikolaj z Radomia (Nicholas of Radom), said by Ludwig to have been 'familiar with the most progressive ..."
Also of course once you've got Mikołaj you're already in Polish rather than Latin name territory. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
I'd vote for Mikołaj Radomski because that's the form used by PSB (major Polish reference work), as specified in references. If it is also more common in English works, well, that's two out of two major arguments I usually consider myself. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
The Grove 2001 article is under Mikołaj Radomski; (it doesn't even mention "Mikołaj z Radomia" except in the bibliography, which is a mistake on their part). The name in the musical sources is "Nicolaus de Radom", which normally would be the name that we should go under, but I fully understand the desire to let Polish composers have Polish spellings). It's good to see the NOHM usage; it is however from 1960 (and based on older writings). Mirosław Perz (in the 70s and 80s mostly) uses "Radomski" in his major articles on the composer ('Kontrafaktury ballad w rękopisie Kras 52 (Pl-Wn 8054)' in Polish and 'Il carattere internazionale delle opere di Mikolaj Radomski' in Italian; and his one small article in English, but it has a translator). -- Michael Scott Cuthbert(talk) 17:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
