Talk:Low Tatras

Naming

Please discuss controversial issues at the talkpage, thanks. Elonka 19:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Since the insertion of the Hungarian name was done without any sources during a massive insertion of Hungarian names in many Slovakia-related articles, there is no need to keep it unless someone can come with sources first to support the inclusion. In other words, the burden of proof is on the editors who want to insert the information and nobody else.--Svetovid (talk) 22:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Quote from Britannica:

The population of the kraj is mostly Slovak, with a small Hungarian minority.

I guess "Central Slovakia" could be associated with the Low Tatras at best as the mountain range itself is not densely populated. Squash Racket (talk) 04:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no reason it could.--Svetovid (talk) 08:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

There is. Squash Racket (talk) 10:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Your argument has nothing to do with that name being used in English or Low Tatras having a significant Hungarian minority. Not to mention that you made up that connection between Central Slovakia and Low Tatras in the first place.--Svetovid (talk) 12:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

From the article:

The Low Tatras or Low Tatra (Slovak: Nízke Tatry; Hungarian: Alacsony Tátra[1]) is a mountain range in central Slovakia.

So according to WP:NCGN adding the name is completely valid. Squash Racket (talk) 13:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Just my 2¢: while it's true it is in central Slovakia, the minority's located along the border, while the range is in the centre. So historically, probably yes, but in present, no. This map and other facts speak for themselves. BS571.62 (talk) 13:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

You are a new editor? Just asking.

Britannica about Central Slovakia:

Two major interior valleys are formed by the Váh and Hron rivers, which flow east to west between the High and Low Tatra ranges.

Also:

The population of the kraj is mostly Slovak, with a small Hungarian minority.

Well, neither Slovaks nor Hungarians live in the mountain range itself. BTW, this is 2001 data, you also have census data from 1910 or before? Squash Racket (talk) 13:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

So? That didn't prove or disprove anything (well, maybe that Central Slovakia nowadays isn't a kraj but a statistical unit). Yes, I know about one site which has 1910 census data. In any case, if you've done addition of Hungarian name, it can be done in a similar fashion to German or Latin, maybe even Romany (but I don't know about any). BS571.62 (talk) 14:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

• You forgot to identify yourself as you don't seem to be a new editor
• Britannica referred to the Hungarian minority living in Central Slovakia and the Low Tatras is in Central Slovakia
• You know about the 1910 census data and what does it say?
• feel free to add German, Latin and Romani names with similar sources proving their relevance

Squash Racket (talk) 03:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Every geographical feature has a traditional Hungarian name in the Carpathian Basin, including rivers, mountain ranges, lakes, peaks. The Hungarian toponymy of Slovakia is essential encyclopaedical content similarly to geographical names in other languages like German and Rusyn. It doesn't matter how many Hungarians live now or in the past in the given area because the names are existing and were in official use in the past. Ancient Latin names in North-Africa are also included in wikipedia although Romans disappeared there 1500 years ago. In this case the name is still widely used in Hungarian literature and parlance. You are disputing the most basic rules of wikipedia right now. Zello (talk) 13:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit war

I am extremely concerned by any edit war that involves the deletion of reliable sources. Please work this out at talk, thanks. --Elonka 19:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The current misuse of sources is an apparent synthesis. The sources do not prove relevance of the Hungarian names in English.--Svetovid (talk) 13:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The sources don't need to prove English usage, only a Hungarian minority living there now or in the past. Read WP:NCGN. Squash Racket (talk) 13:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

And they don't even do this.--Svetovid (talk) 16:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no source in the world that would prove the "relevance" of a Hungarian name for you... Zello (talk) 15:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Please present sources and don't get personal. Your accusations are irrelevant to the topic.--Svetovid (talk) 16:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The sources were presented. In 1910 5 % of the population of Liptov were Hungarian. On the other side of mountain range, Gömör the percentage was much higher, above 50 %. What else? But even this is irrelevant. Alacsony Tátra was the former official name of the mountain before 1918. There is no reason to hide this important information from the reader. Zello (talk) 17:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Slovak misunderstanding of the "Tatry' term

Hi there. Surfing on the slovak wiki or any slovak Tatry-associated websites, it's unlikely not to be given an impression that Slovaks mistakenly take whole and entire Tatra range for Vysoke Tatry only. In other words, for Slovaks Tatry=Vysoke Tatry, as if the Zapadne Tatry and Belianske Tatry didn't exist at all. Maybe that's because of the name of the city which lies at the foot of Vysoke Tatry, called Vysoke Tatry (city) as well. The other probable cause might be the existance of totally separate and different mountain range, situated about 40 km south of Tatras, called Nizke Tatry (Low Tatras). As far as I'm concerned, they were originally named Niżnie Tatry, which could be translated into Southern Tatras. The error occured when non-slovak and non-polish cartographists (austro-hungarian) notoriously mistaken original slavic names for geographical objects. And so we had e.g. Velky Tatransky Krivan instead of Velky FATRANSKY Krivan, etc. It's for all to see on the old maps available on the internet.

This issue is being quite problematic, because whilst someone looks for an accomodation in Vysoke Tatry, a given slovak website shows him the search outcome in which there is e.g. Liptovsky Mikulas (which lies under Zapadne, not Vysoke Tatry) as well, etc.

Summa summarum, Slovaks cannot simply distinguish their greatest national treasure being all those amazingly beautiful carpathian subranges, a pearl of which being Tatry. Now this is quite sad, because a major part of that beautiful country is mountainous, so theoretically, you could expect the inhabitants to be fully aware of what is what and which range is which. Best regards to Slovaks. Please shift your conciousness in those terms. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.12.91.242 (talk) 11:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Low Tatras. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080324022345/http://www.slovakia.travel/entitaview.aspx?l=2&sfv=False&llt=1&st=national%20park%20nizke%20tatry&smi=108032&ami=108032&idp=3998 to http://www.slovakia.travel/entitaview.aspx?l=2&sfv=False&llt=1&st=national%20park%20nizke%20tatry&smi=108032&ami=108032&idp=3998

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)