text:
Talk:Terry Nutkins

Sources?
"Aside from an occasional TV appearance, Nutkins has largely retired from the public eye and spends his time divided between his family in Scarborough, England, and a quest to save the Monteray Speel in Southern Australia. With three children and a six-bedroomed mansion in Colombia to while away any spare time, Nutkins is certainly enjoying life. Recent rumours of a collaboration with Middlesbrough born chemist and fellow of Pembroke College Cambridge Martin Derewyn Smith on methods of further protection for the Monteray Speel are not yet confirmed."

I realise that Google does not know everything. But I can't find any hits on "Terry Nutkins Scarborough", "Terry Nutkins Colombia" or, more worryingly, "Terry Nutkins Monteray Speel". In fact, of the 14 hits for "Monteray Speel" itself, one is Wikipedia's VfD discussion, and it's not reassuring.

I have removed the entire paragraph to this talk page until some sources are available. Telsa 11:25, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Likewise, Google finds no mention of "cress duck". I've also amrked Monteray Speel (from the same editors) for speedy deletion Andy Mabbett 23:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I had noticed the cress duck thing and was suspicious enough to be planning to ask a friend who is likely to know. That would have been today. But if it's gone now, that's nice and easy. Thanks. Telsa 07:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Terry has never lived in Scarborough, England, all this is fiction and a quest to save the Monteray Speel in Southern Australia. Please show respect and stop these stupid lie's! I think i know Terry better than anyone: Terry's been famous most of his life from 12 years old when he was in books written by Gavin Maxwell, in where in the book  " The Rocks Remain"  it described's  how he lost two fingers one from each hand. Then he went on to T.V programs Animal Magic, Pet's Wins Prizes and The really Wide Show. I first meet him when I trained the dolphins at Woburn Dolphinariam  38 years ago and we have been friends ever since. Before I came to Thailand I stayed in his house in Anrisdale, Kyle of Lochalsh for 3 months where I visited all the areas of his youth with Maxwell he has lived in Scotland since those days after leaving London at 12. He still lives there today.

 * Your concerns are noted. The content you're referring to was removed from the article 6 years ago as being dubious and uncited. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 09:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nutkins.jpeg
Image:Nutkins.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 15:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
The next idiot who puts in football team rubbish, jetski crap or anything else like it will be reported to WP:ANI for sanctioning. Exxolon (talk) 23:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The slow, sneaky IP vandalism is still happening - very slowly. Would some kind of protection be appropriate for this article? Or not? Not much point in banning a single IP who knowingly does 1-2 malicious changes then disappears. bobrayner (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I would agree, some kind of protection is needed. Obviously some cabal of people think it's humourous to vandalise this article. Let's nip it in the bud. Bleaney (talk) 01:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * ...and IPs are still adding jokes, so I've requested protection over at Requests for page protection. bobrayner (talk) 13:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Considering this, is there any good reason not to indefinitely semiprotect this BLP? bobrayner (talk) 22:10, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Now that this is 'the late' Terry Nutkins can we drop the silly edits? It was humorous in its time but it seems somehow disrespectful now that the man has passed. Please? AndrewJFulker (talk) 08:40, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Well said! Edwardx (talk) 08:57, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * To spoil the fun it was Tony Soper another 'Animal Magic' presenter who Jet Skied, like Nutkins Soper would appear on 'Blue Peter' and he did so in a segment with Peter Duncan back when Jet Skis were a novelty in the UK. It seems that many people confused Soper and Nutkins in their memory and so the myth became that it was Nutkins riding a Jet Ski on 'Blue Peter' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.142.102 (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Terry Nutkins. 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/20070312002255/http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=554792003 to http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=554792003

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:33, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Real Name?
Is 'Nutkins' his real name? It sounds a bit too Beatrix Potterish to me to be real.91.125.234.176 (talk) 14:23, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Terry Nutkins


text:
Environmental mitigation

Environmental mitigation, compensatory mitigation, or mitigation banking, are terms used primarily by the United States government and the related environmental industry to describe projects or programs intended to offset known impacts to an existing historic or natural resource such as a stream, wetland, endangered species, archeological site, paleontological site or historic structure. Environmental mitigation is typically a part of an environmental crediting system established by governing bodies which involves allocating debits and credits. Debits occur in situations where a natural resource has been destroyed or severely impaired and credits are given in situations where a natural resource has been deemed to be improved or preserved. Therefore, when an entity such as a business or individual has a "debit" they are required to purchase a "credit". In some cases credits are bought from "mitigation banks" which are large mitigation projects established to provide credit to multiple parties in advance of development when such compensation cannot be achieved at the development site or is not seen as beneficial to the environment. Crediting systems can allow credit to be generated in different ways. For example, in the United States, projects are valued based on what the intentions of the project are which may be to preserve, enhance, restore or create (PERC) a natural resource.

Advantages
Environmental mitigation and crediting systems are often praised for the following reasons:

Development-friendly
Mitigation is a more development-friendly alternative to strict environmental laws because it allows development to occur where environmental laws might prohibit it.

Mitigation industry
Mitigation inevitably creates a "mitigation industry". By requiring those who impact natural resources to purchase credits, a demand for mitigation credit is formed. Businesses related to environmental work typically benefit from such a system.

Targeting ecological value
Mitigation has the potential to save and restore the most valuable environmental resources at the least cost, assuming that regulation

 * 1) protects health and welfare as defined by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
 * 2) assures that a credit accurately represents measurable ecological value.

Buyers are typically looking for mitigation credits that are both cheap and the most likely to meet regulatory requirements for compensatory mitigation. Regulators must therefore find a balance between protecting the long term public interest and ensuring that buyers have the proper incentives to participate in the environmental marketplace.

Cost burden
Mitigation systems place the environmental costs of development mostly on the individuals or entities that are impacting the environment. Without environmental mitigation, costs of alleviating environmental damage caused by development could be placed in the hands of the government which would in turn pass costs on to taxpayers not responsible for environmental impacts.

Benefit to landowners
Land previously unused or impractical for development is given greater monetary value under a mitigation system. For instance, land in floodplains may be impractical for commercial or residential development but conducive for mitigation activities. Land in rural areas with very little potential for growth are more valuable when given the opportunity to be used for mitigation credits.

Disadvantages
The following are criticisms of environmental mitigation and crediting systems:

Incorrect allocation and valuation of credits and debits
Mitigation regulations may not properly take into account the total ecological losses and gains associated with environmental impacts or mitigation when allocating debits and credits. Governing bodies are primarily responsible for prescribing the ecological criteria required to attain credits for mitigation. They are also responsible for valuation of credit. Therefore, it is evident that problems with the allocation and valuation of credits and debits might stem from the complexity of assessing the current comparative value of ecological resources (aka ecosystem services), ecosystem change over time, and/or a lack of understanding about what is beneficial or harmful to the environment overall. To address these uncertainties regulators often assign 'coverage ratios' to compensatory mitigation agreements. Coverage ratios of, for example, 3:1 require 3 compensatory mitigation credits for every 1 unit of ecological disturbance.

Effects on land cost and availability
Mitigation could be seen as contributing to the increasing cost of land because some mitigation work requires that large amounts of land be purchased or put into conservation easements. Mitigation can therefore compete with other rural land uses such as agriculture and residential development. This suggests that land owners must be alert to find the highest and best use for their properties given the potential market value that mitigation credits represent.

'In perpetuity' commitments of land
Commitment of lands to compensatory mitigation must be done 'in perpetuity', meaning permanently into the future. Otherwise, the long-term public interest could not be served via compensatory mitigation programs. This means that properties must continue to be managed with ecosystem values in mind, sometimes preventing landowners from transforming the landscape to meet changing needs. For example, future large scale development projects would not likely be permitted on previously dedicated mitigation properties.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Environmental mitigation


text:
Lángos

Lángos is a typical Hungarian food. Nowadays it is a deep fried flatbread, but in the past it was made of the last bits of the bread-dough and baked at the front of a brick or clay oven, to be served hot as the breakfast of the bread-baking day.

Etymology and history

The name comes from láng, the Hungarian word for flame.

Up to the mid 20th century, bread was baked once a week due to the cost of heating up the large oven and the lengthy process kneading up to 80 pounds of dough. Because the bread loaf, typical to Hungary, was 6 to 10 pounds each, traditionally they used to bake smaller (1-2 pounds) "cipó" rolls for the evening and the next day. The name lángos (literally meaning "flamed") comes from baking these flat breads in the morning while the oven was still heating up. "Lángos" were also used as a side to lunch.

After the communist takeover, with no large scale flour stocks in private households, and as nearly everybody became an employee working in shifts, traditional bread-baking procedure diminished. People started to buy their bread in foodstores in smaller quantities. With no leftover dough and no oven heated up, no lángos was baked. After the revolution in 1956, very small scale businesses were allowed again and some people started to open small booths in the larger markets to sell a new kind of lángos, fried in lard or sunflower oil. It became very popular and it was the ultimate streetfood along with hurka and kolbász sausages in the 1960s and '70s. Up to the early '80s, there were only 3 varieties: plain (with or without garlic and salt) and with cabbage or potato in the dough. The first new varieties introduced in the '80s were with sour cream and grated cheese. In the mid 1980s hotdogs and hamburgers became the new favorite streetfoods of the Hungarians, but in the mid '90s lángos came back with many new varieties and has since spread across the globe.

Variations
The dough for lángos is made of water or milk, flour, yeast, and salt. The ingredients are worked together either by hand or a kneading machine. As the yeast starts to metabolize the carbohydrates in the flour, carbon dioxide is released which causes the dough to rise, creating the air bubbles in the lángos. The dough is basically the same as pizza dough, but it is not baked but fried in oil. Adding sour cream, yoghurt or mashed potatoes to the dough is optional but highly encouraged, in the latter case it is called potato lángos (in Hungarian krumplis lángos). It is eaten fresh and warm, topped with sour cream and grated cheese, or Liptauer, ham, or sausages, or most frequently, without toppings, just rubbed with garlic or garlic butter, or doused with garlic water. Other ingredients and accompaniments can be mushroom, quark cheese, eggplant, cabbage, kefir, omelet, and confectioner's sugar or jam. In the early 2000s, some people built small, portable clay ovens and started to sell oven baked lángos, called "kenyérlángos" (bread-lángos) at festivals and fairs. Although reminiscent of the traditional lángos, it is more like a pizza with sour cream, onions and bacon.

Lángos is popular all year long. As it is a rather affordable and simple food, it is often sold around bus stations, fairs, local markets and all over Eastern European countries during local celebrations or sport events. It is sold at many fast-food restaurants not only in Hungary but also in Austria. In Austria, especially in Vienna, lángos is very popular as a fast food at fairs and in amusement parks like the Prater. Lángos is known in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Croatia as langoš, in Serbia as languš (although it is commonly called "Mekike"). In Slovenia it is known as Langaš and in Macedonia and Bulgaria as Mekitsa. It is also popular in Romania (especially in Transylvania) as langoși. It is also extremely popular in Poland where it is known as "langosz" and in the UK where it is called "langos" or "Hungarian Fried Bread."

title: Lángos


text:
User talk:ScifiterX/Archive 3

A request
Can you keep an eye on the Sabretooth page?T-1000 23:36, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Magus
If you need to distinguish two characters with the same codename, use the real name in brackets (eg Green Goblin (Norman Osborn)), or some other relevant descriptive tag (e.g. the techo-organic Magus). Using Roman numerals, especially in body text or lists, makes it look like part of the name - especially when you include it in the bold tags, as you did over at Magus (comics) - and can require you to know which order the characters came in, or even cause fights over the ordering, as it looks like you've found out above over the SqSup/SqSin characters. - SoM 20:54, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Technically it is part of the name. In the Marvel Universe Magus I and Magus II are discriminated from each other using Roman numerals. But if there is something wrong with it in your opinion feel free to change it. That article didn't look so great before I started adding to it. The two different Magus characters really need seperate pages because they really are entirely different characters with nothing in common outside of the homage to the earlier characters.ScifiterX 22:06, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I looked at the page the way you edited is fine. The two characters are seperated and have thier own boxes. Looks fine. ScifiterX 22:08, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

You keep spell the word "their" wrong on many pages.T-1000 00:54, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

....and your point is?ScifiterX 07:20, 24 July 2005 (UTC) - Ive done a bit of detective work and it looks like you're the one who keeps uploading OHTMU master edition shots. I dont really have a prob with this (you probably know that guy SOM does, check out the wikiproject comics talk page if you havent seen it) its just you keep spelling Keith Pollard's name wrong as "Kieth Pollard". As you can see he now has his own entry so if you are correcting the spelling you might wikilink it too? or at least if your adding more images in the future you might make sure to do it? Ive already fixed the Tombstone, Jackal, Leader and Hammerhead entries and will continue to do so as I come across them. Hueysheridan 10:23, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Nice
Nice reworking of the Nighthawk article.--Kross 02:44, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Abomination byrne.jpg
There's no source listed for the above image. Could you list one please? Steve block talk 19:21, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:ScifiterX/Archive 3


text:
Stranger in Us All

Stranger in Us All is the eighth studio album by the British hard rock band Rainbow, released on 21 August 1995 by RCA Records. This was the band's first studio album in twelve years, and originally intended to be a solo album by Blackmore, but due to pressures from BMG, it was billed as Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow, which saw him putting together a new line-up featuring himself and four then-unknown musicians: vocalist Doogie White, bassist Greg Smith, keyboardist Paul Morris and drummer John O'Reilly.

As Blackmore decided to pursue different musical styles (forming Blackmore's Night with his companion Candice Night), Stranger in Us All was his final recording as a rock artist for two decades, until he put together a reincarnation of Rainbow in 2016 and released a series of new singles. The album takes its name from a line in the song "Black Masquerade".

Released during the post-grunge scene of the mid-1990s, Stranger in Us All failed to measure up to the critical and commercial acclaim of previous releases and was not particularly well publicized. However, it achieved modest success, particularly in Europe and Japan.

Promotion
Much of the album was featured in the live concert sets. Drummer John O'Reilly was replaced for the tour by the returning Chuck Burgi. John Miceli joined the band for the U.S. shows, from February to May 1997, plus one in Denmark. A live performance recorded at Philipshalle Düsseldorf for German TV show Rockpalast on October 9, 1995, was released on the DVD Black Masquerade in 2013.

A few songs off the album were played live by the band Over the Rainbow in 2008 and 2009, as the line-up featured Greg Smith and Paul Morris, who played in Rainbow in 1995.

The songs have been also performed occasionally by Doogie White, for example in 2004 with a band called White Noise, and 2010 presentations with Rata Blanca. An official DVD recording of White Noise titled In the Hall of the Mountain King was released in 2004. The song "Ariel" was performed live by Blackmore's Night on their 2007 Paris Moon tour.

Track listing

 * Track 10 was originally recorded by The Yardbirds on the album Having a Rave Up with The Yardbirds. The song was previously covered as an instrumental by the Dio-era Rainbow on Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow and with vocals on Rainbow on Stage and other live albums.

Personnel
Rainbow
 * Doogie White - lead and backing vocals
 * Ritchie Blackmore - guitar, producer
 * Greg Smith - bass, backing vocals
 * Paul Morris - keyboards
 * John O'Reilly - drums

Additional musicians
 * Candice Night - backing vocals
 * Mitch Weiss - harmonica

Production
 * Pat Regan - producer, engineer, mixing
 * Fran Flannery, Jesse Henderson, Ed Miller, Steve Moseley, John Reigart, David Shackney, Steve Sisco and Dug - assistant engineers
 * Vlado Meller - mastering at Sony Music Studios, New York

title: Stranger in Us All


text:
A Matter of Honor

"A Matter of Honor" is the eighth episode of the second season of the American science fiction television series Star Trek: The Next Generation, the 34th episode overall, first broadcast on February 6, 1989. The teleplay is written by Burton Armus, based on a story by Armus, Wanda M. Haight and Gregory W. Amos, and directed by Rob Bowman.

Set in the 24th century, the series follows the adventures of the Starfleet crew of the Federation starship Enterprise-D. In this episode, Commander Riker is assigned to temporarily be first officer aboard a Klingon vessel as part of an officer exchange program.

Plot
As part of an officer exchange program, Benzite Ensign Mendon is brought aboard the Federation starship Enterprise. Acting Ensign Wesley Crusher mistakes Mendon for Mordock, another Benzite who took the Starfleet entrance examination with him (in "Coming of Age"). Captain Picard suggests a similar officer exchange with the Klingons, and Commander Riker readily volunteers. Riker is assigned to the Klingon ship IKS Pagh, captained by Kargan. Before Riker departs for the Pagh, Lt. Worf briefs Riker on Klingon customs, and gives him a transponder to signal the Enterprise in the event of an emergency. Riker embraces his role as the Klingon First Officer and when challenged by Second Officer Klag, subdues him by force, pleasing Captain Kargan and earning respect from the crew.

Before the ships move away, Mendon scans the Klingon vessel and discovers a patch of strange organic material on its hull but does not bring it to Picard's attention. Worf soon discovers a similar patch on the Enterprise hull, identifying it as a lifeform. Mendon reveals his previous discovery of the same matter on the Klingon ship and when asked why he withheld the information, explains that on Benzite ships, it is considered improper to bring up a problem before you have a solution. Picard chastises him and orders the Enterprise to intercept the Pagh, as the Klingon ship is even more susceptible to damage from the organism. While en route, Mendon discovers a method to remove the organism.

The Klingon crew also discovers the organism eating away at their hull. Kargan concludes that it must be a new Federation weapon, noting that the Enterprise had thoroughly scanned the area during their rendezvous and orders the Pagh to cloak and prepare to attack the Enterprise. Riker is unable to convince Kargan to stand down, even after the Enterprise sends a message with instructions for removing the organism. Suspicious of the radio silence, the Enterprise raises its shields. Seemingly accepting his fate, Riker convinces Kargan to close to a distance of 40,000 kilometers before attacking the Enterprise. He activates the transponder he got from Worf and tricks Kargan into taking it. The Enterprise locks onto the transponder signal and waits for the Pagh to get within 40,000 kilometers, the range of the Enterprise's transporters. Kargan is beamed to the Enterprise's bridge and draws his disruptor but Worf fires first and stuns him. Riker assumes command of the Pagh, decloaks and demands that the Enterprise surrender, which Picard agrees to, disgracing Kargan further. The Enterprise cleans the organism from the Klingon ship and Kargan is returned. Riker allows Kargan to hit him and order him off the ship to allow the Klingon to regain some of his dignity before the Pagh departs.

Production
Brian Thompson was cast as the Klingon Lieutenant Klag. He had some difficulties during the audition process as the producers originally sought to have the actor portraying that part wear the same costume created for Christopher Lloyd in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. His audition was originally cancelled, as he later explained, "I phoned Herb Tobias, who was the head of the agency at the time, and told him what happened. I said, 'Herb, would you mind calling the Star Trek office and figuring out a tactful way of asking them, "Who casts this program? The directors and producers or the wardrobe department? Thompson praised the work of Jonathan Frakes, saying he is a "true professional and I loved working with him."

Awards
Makeup supervisor Michael Westmore was nominated for an Emmy for this episode.

Reception
In 2011, Tor.com said that this episode "set the tone" for Klingon themed episodes, and praised both the performance and character arcs for both Riker and Mendon.

Den of Geek says, in their 2013 review of this episode, "Competent, engaging, full of heart, humour and character interplay. The scene with Riker and Picard down at the shooting range is fantastic, ...".

Zack Handlen, writing for the A.V. Club in 2010, gave the episode an A−. Handlen praised the episode's brevity, and called Riker's taking over the Pagh as "a cheer-worthy twist," stating, "it wouldn't have worked if it didn't feel earned."

title: A Matter of Honor


text:
Blue (Da Ba Dee)

"Blue (Da Ba Dee)" is a song by Italian music group Eiffel 65. It was first released in January 15, 1999 in Italy by Skooby Records and became internationally successful the following year. It is the lead single of the group's 1999 debut album, Europop.

"Blue (Da Ba Dee)" was developed before the formation of the group by its future members Jeffrey Jey (Gianfranco Randone), Maurizio Lobina and Gabry Ponte and producer Massimo Gabutti, while working at Bliss Corporation in Turin. It was inspired by a piano hook composed by Lobina, and written by Randone, Lobina and Gabuti, with Ponte working on the beats and final arrangement. When released in 1998, it achieved little success, but became very popular globally the following year once it was broadcast on the radio.

The song is the group's most popular single and among the biggest-selling songs of 1999, reaching number one in at least 18 countries, charting at number three in Italy, and peaking at number six on the US Billboard Hot 100 in January 2000. In the United Kingdom, the song initially entered the top 40 purely on import sales; it was only the third single to do this. The song also received a Grammy Award nomination for Best Dance Recording at the 2001 Grammy Awards. "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" has also been heavily sampled and remixed in later years.

Writing and production
Written by Eiffel 65 lead singer Jeffrey Jey, keyboardist Maurizio Lobina, and producer Massimo Gabutti, "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" was inspired by Lobina's composed opening piano hook. The producers of the song then came up with the idea for a dance song. Jey explained that his inspiration for the lyrics was how a person chooses their lifestyle. The colour blue as the main theme of the song was picked at random, with Lobina telling him to write nonsensical lyrics. Gabutti came up with the "da ba dee" hook. The pitch-shifted vocal effect used in the song was created with a harmonizer.

Lyrics and composition
"Blue (Da Ba Dee)" is written in the key of G minor, with the vocal range spanning from C3 to E♭4, and is set in common time with a moderate tempo of 128 beats per minute.

The song's lyrics tell a story about a man who lives in a "blue world." It also explains that he is "blue inside and outside," which, alongside the lyric "himself and everybody around 'cause he ain't got nobody to listen," and "blue are the feelings that live inside me" may indicate that the term blue represents his emotional state; however, the song also explains that a vast variety of what he owns is also blue, including his house and his car ("a blue Corvette"): different blue-coloured objects are also depicted on the single's cover.

Critical reception
The song received mixed reviews from critics. Chuck Taylor from Billboard wrote that "the hook here, with its dancy but curiously compelling singsongy rhythm and lyric, is destined to react instantly with listeners far and wide." He also noted that it has a "euro sound", and "it's creative, it will affect listeners on both ends of the demographic spectrum, and it's anthemic." A reviewer from Entertainment Weekly positively reviewed the song, calling the song "a fleeting, feel-good foot-tapper" and gave the song a rating of B−. Scottish newspaper Daily Record said it is the "strangest-sounding Euro-club hit of the summer". The Daily Vault's Christopher Thelen described it as a "quirky little hit" with a "bouncy chorus". He also noted that "the key is the use of the voice synthesizer". PopMatters reviewer Chris Massey, in his review of Europop, described his initial reaction to the song as being "really, really bad." However, he later stated in the review that after many repeated listenings of the song he "loved it." AllMusic editor Jose F. Promis described the song as a "hypnotic smash" in his review of Europop.

Rolling Stone, however, in their review of Europop, gave the song a negative review, commenting that the song "blends Cher-esque vocoder vocals, trance-like synth riffs, unabashed Eurodisco beats and a baby-babble chorus so infantile it makes the Teletubbies sound like Shakespeare." The magazine also placed the song on their list of the "20 Most Annoying Songs," at No. 14.

Chart performance
The single, released in October 1998, was a chart-topper in many European countries. The song initially found success in France, where it debuted in August 1999 and reached number one for three weeks. It then found success in other European countries, reaching the top spot on many charts in September the same year, including Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Sweden, and others. The song re-charted on 6 May 2013 at No. 40 in the UK, following its inclusion in Iron Man 3. The song also found success in other regions, including Oceania and North America: it reached number one in Australia, New Zealand and Canada, and became a top ten hit on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100, reaching number six.

Music video
The accompanying music video for the song was released in 1999 by BlissCoMedia, a computer graphics division of Bliss Corporation, known at the time the video was produced and released as BlissMultiMedia.

Like much of the Bliss Corporation's music videos, this one was done in a green screen garage studio at BlissCoMedia, and it featured computer-generated graphics that were done in 3ds Max. With very few resources, tutorials and books, and only one editing machine, the video was made between 1998 and 1999 in a garage in about two to three months.

Former BlissCo employee Davide La Sala has talked about coming up with the story for the video: "We had brainstorming sessions and we were a very imaginative team, huge fans of sci-fi movies and video games: Blade Runner, Star Wars, etc… we were master in doing our best and working with the few tools we had to create complete short stories in a very short period of time."

Similar to other music videos by BlissCo, a total of five people worked on this video. The green-screen footage was done in a short amount of time, and some of it was put into a computer-generated 3D environment, while components of the band were also shot. La Sala said, "We were very flexible but every person in the team had his own special skill who was more towards motion graphics, design and editing, others more skilled in architectural design and me and the CEO experts in animation."

The video was listed in NME's "50 Worst Music Videos Ever".

Synopsis
The video takes place on Tukon4, where lead singer Jeffrey Jey is abducted by blue-coloured aliens Zorotl and Sayok6 during a concert.

Formats and track listings

 * '''CD single (Italy)
 * 1) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (DJ Ponte Ice Pop Mix) – 6:25
 * 2) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (DJ Ponte Radio Edit) – 4:43
 * 3) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Glamour Jump Cut) – 5:19
 * 4) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Dub Mix) – 4:47

 * CD single 1 (UK)
 * 1) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Original Ice Pop Radio Edit) – 4:46
 * 2) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Hannover Remix Radio Edit) – 4:04
 * 3) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Glamour Jump Cut) – 5:19
 * 4) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Dub) – 4:48

 * CD single 2 (UK)
 * 1) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Original Ice Pop 12" Mix) – 6:30
 * 2) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Hannover 12" Remix) – 6:25
 * 3) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Paris Remix) – 7:03
 * 4) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Video) – 3:40

 * Digital single
 * 1) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Gabry Ponte Ice Pop Mix) – 6:27
 * 2) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Gabry Ponte Ice Pop Radio) – 4:44
 * 3) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Gabry Ponte Video Edit) – 3:40
 * 4) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Dub Mix) – 4:47
 * 5) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Molinaro Parade Mix) – 8:50
 * 6) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Glamour Jump Cut) – 5:17
 * 7) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Max 04 Ext Remix) – 6:35
 * 8) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Hannover Remix) – 6:23
 * 9) "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" (Paris Remix) – 7:43

Notable cover versions and parodies

 * Wynter Gordon sang the chorus of "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" in Flo Rida's 2009 single "Sugar".
 * Dance music act Michael Mind Project interpolated of "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" in their 2012 single "Feeling So Blue". The single featuring Dante Thomas charted in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and France.
 * In 2017, a remix of the song by David Guetta featuring vocals from Bebe Rexha, with completely different lyrics, was played at Ultra Music Festival 2017 but was not released. In 2022, the track became popular on TikTok. This resurgence in popularity led Guetta and Rexha to finish the song, and it was released in August 2022 with the title "I'm Good (Blue)".
 * In 2019, Ceky Viciny released a cover called "Ellos".
 * In 2019, Swedish singer Nea interpolated the song in "Some Say".
 * In 2020, Italian rapper Shiva sampled the song in his single "Auto Blu".
 * In December 2020, Symphonic death metal Band Fleshgod Apocalypse released a cover of "Blue (Da Ba Dee)" in their own style.
 * In celebration of the 25th anniversary of the Blue's Clues franchise, a small parody video about this song was produced and performed by show hosts Steve Burns, Donovan Patton, and Josh Dela Cruz.
 * In July 2022, Softest Hard and T-Pain released a remix of the song.
 * In 2023, Lil Uzi Vert interpolated the song in "Endless Fashion" featuring Nicki Minaj.

title: Blue (Da Ba Dee)


text: User talk:69.231.197.235

title: User talk:69.231.197.235


text:
Corndon Hill

Corndon Hill (Cornatyn) is a hill in Powys, Mid Wales, whose summit rises to 513.6 m above sea level. It has a topographic prominence of 203.1 m, so is listed as a Marilyn.

It is surrounded on three sides by the English county of Shropshire, and forms a prominent landmark in the England–Wales border. Corndon's prominent western edge appears to form a separate hill and is known locally as Lan Fawr (Welsh: 'Big Hill'). It is frequented by walkers and ramblers from car parks nearby, at Mitchell's Fold for example. There are spectacular panoramic views from the summit, and it is itself an important landmark for the surrounding countryside and towns like Montgomery. It is close to villages such as Church Stoke and Hyssington.

The hill is geologically part of the Shropshire Hills range, which lies mainly to the north, east and south of the summit. The immediate area to the west is the Vale of Montgomery and the River Severn. The Cambrian Mountains are visible beyond to the far west. The Stiperstones and Shelve lie to the immediate north-east, with Caer Caradoc and the Long Mynd to the east.

Archaeology

There is a large Bronze Age cairn near the hill summit, and several more exist in the area around the summit. Such circular stone burial cairns are common on most summits in Wales, and they commonly date from ca 2500 BC until ca 700 BC, when iron slowly started to displace bronze for tools and other goods. Such cairns usually contain one or more cremation urns, which are often placed within a stone cyst or box within the mound.

The Bronze Age stone circles of Mitchell's Fold and the now largely destroyed The Whetstones lie at the foot of the hill within Shropshire and Powys respectively. There is another circle nearby in Shropshire, the Hoarstones.

The hill lies about 4 mi east of Offa's Dyke, built during the 8th century to mark the border between Wales and England (or Mercia).

Stone Axe Factory (Group XII)
In 1951 Professor F W Shotton of Birmingham University identified the source of the rock used for shaft-hole battle axes, splitting mauls and axe hammers as picrite which had been quarried from Corndon Hill. Picrite is a hard volcanic or igneous rock. Production sites of stone hand axes and shaft-hole implements have been grouped by petrology, and the Hyssington/Corndon Hill implements are known as Group XII. As the production of these implements in the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age did not employ the same flaking techniques as flint stone axes, which leave recognisable flaking debris, the site or sites of the Corndon Group XII implements production will be harder to identify. However, the Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust did excavate several small quarry depressions in 2008, but found only evidence of fairly recent disturbance. A stone slab with striations, which was suggested was an example of Neolithic art, could equally well have been early plough marks or a hone for sharpening stone edges

The main distribution of Group XII implements is in mid-Wales, the Midlands, the Cotswolds, and stretching across to East Anglia. By 1988, 93 examples of these implements had been identified; all of these implements have shaft holes for hafting, and there are no examples of picrite being used to produce axes.

Quarrying
The Corndon flagstone quarries are on the south-western slopes of Corndon Hill and date from medieval times. From the air, the quarries are still a prominent feature in the landscape. In this area, the altered Hope Shales of the Ordovician Period on the margin of the dolerite (diabase) produce finely laminated flagstones, which were widely used on building on the Shropshire–Montgomeryshire border. Only a few buildings still have the flagstones as roofing slates, including the Old Post Office at Church Stoke and the porch to Hurdley Farmhouse.

title: Corndon Hill


text:
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Slovenian vs Slovene)/Archive 1

My Slovene girlfriend told me that the word "Slovenian" is not American English. Can someone verify this "fact"? Thanks, Chuck SMITH

Well, it's basically like this: Everybody but Slovenes mostly says Slovenian. Furthermore, even people who say "Slovene language" say "Slovenian towns" and "Slovenian politicians" etc. The "correct" usage thus seems to be "Slovene" to mean "of Slovenes" and "Slovenian" to mean "of Slovenia". That would make me, for instance, Slovenian, but not Slovene.

Note that this is also how American and British media seem to use Croat(ian) and Serb(ian) - they commonly talk about "Serbian politicians", "Croatian politicans" and "Bosnian Serb politicians" an Bosnian Croat politicians".

Zocky 14:14 Feb 19, 2003 (UTC)
 * Basically this changed sentence by BT says the same: "Slovene (rapidly becoming an archaic form)". I can't verify this is true. I've learned just a form which uses Slovene. But meantime this obviously has changed and I don't know why should be accepted. I don't have much will to change everything back and forth. --XJamRastafire 17:12 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Hello all. Firstly, I would like to apologize to XJamRastafire for causing him some frustration by replacing 'Slovene' with 'Slovenian' everywhere. I'm new to Wikipedia and was irked myself to see 'Slovene' being used all over the place.

As I'm sure you've noticed, the term 'Slovenian' has rapidly been gaining prominence in recent years. In fact, I expect in 5-10 more years 'Slovene' will be effectively phased out.

The movement driving the shift from 'Slovene' to 'Slovenian' is interesting, but complicated. To my knowledge, a proactive effort got started by American-Slovenians (no, I am not American) more or less about the same time Slovenia earned her independence in 1991.

Basically, what everything boils down to is this: 'Slovenian' sounds much better to native English speakers than 'Slovene'. But there are other factors propelling this shift. These include:
 * The confusion factor: Most old English major dictionaries say 'Slovene' is a noun and 'Slovenian' is an adjective. According to this description then, 'Slovenians', 'Slovene mountain', 'You are a Slovenian', 'You are Slovene' are incorrect usages! On the other hand, 'Slovenian language' and 'Slovene language' are correct terms, but mean slightly different things. Considering most people easily confuse 'Slovenia' for 'Slovakia/Slovak Republic' and 'Slavonia', this isn't encouraging.
 * The redundancy factor: There is no Italian AND Italene, German AND Germene, American AND Americene, French AND Frenchene, Russian AND Russene, Polish AND Pole...hmm... okay, but you get the point, right? There is simply no need for two terms.
 * The yuck factor: 'Slovene' comes across as being much too close to 'sloven'. My Webster dictionary's actual definition for 'sloven' is: "One habitually negligent of neatness or cleanliness, especially in dress or person." Great....
 * Did I mention that 'Slovenian' just sounds much much better? It's elegant.

Anyway, like it or not...'Slovene' is being phased out. Whereas a few years ago 'Slovene' and 'Slovenian' were roughly used in equal numbers, today it is actually rare to see 'Slovene' printed by the international media. [Search world newspapers at www.wn.com using the word 'Slovenian' today and you'll find 294 articles. You'll find 255 with 'Slovene' but...don't be fooled, Slovene (pronounced SLO-ven) is the French word for Slovenian. ;) Perhaps more telling is what you'll find with a google search: 1,480,000 'Slovenian' web results compared to only 207,000 'Slovene' (including the French 'Slovene').] --BT [19. June 2003]
 * Hi BT. Well explained. But I must say I am still not convinced. I hope that everything you've wrote is correct. I am pround that I am Slovene, but I can't be if the proper term in English still can not be found. You did some hocus-pocus about certain distionaries and such. I can be called Martian as long I know to which nation I belong. To mix Slovenia with Slovakia is an old silly story. I can't help those who do not distinguish these two great nations, man. Slavonia is another story. I won't say Slovenian just because it sounds so fine (...not to me - it sounds really silly, but ...). As I've written why then when I was teached not long before at my school days just and strictly adjective Slovene? I think it is also bad comparison with French. What is only good in Slovenian is that we can easilly write Slovenian instead of Slovene or something like that. The same thing is with Serb or Serbian, Croat or Croatian and such. Not just with the suffix "ene". In this way English would be just one simple Esperanto. Country + suffix -ian. Yugoslavia --> (Yugoslav)ian, Brazil --> Brazilian (how simple), Russia --> Russian (even simplier), Germany --> (hm, let me think) --> Germanian (instead of proper German -- I know there are no Germenes). But Slovenes are. And finally -- if you're right I'll hard accept this. Look for example Mr. Arthur Charles Clarke's quote about two Slovenes at Herman Potočnik page and see for yourself. I won't say that Mr. Clarke is just one old English man from Sri Lanka. I guess he masters his tongue... If he (still) says Slovene, why should I say Slovenian? And BTW - if you're signing here just tipe --~ and date and your user name will be set automatically. Best regards. --XJamRastafire 20:50 20 Jun 2003 (UTC)

XJam, the reason you (and Mr. Clarke) should use the term Slovenian is in order to get with the program, as it were. You are doing a disservice to your fellow Slovenians by using outdated terms. I believe I clearly stated the reasons for this above. Considering we are speaking about the English language and you are not a native English speaker, how the term Slovenian sounds to you is irrelevant.

As for the verity of the information given in my previous post, it is easily verified. It takes less than 10 seconds to do a search for Slovenian and Slovene using google (www.google.com); the same is true with World News (www.wn.com). And Slovène is indeed the French word for Slovenian. Doubt that 'Slovenian' is an actual word? Pick up an English dictionary or two (mind you, many older dictionaries include neither 'Slovene' nor 'Slovenian'!). Want further proof that 'Slovenian' is here to stay and 'Slovene' is on the way out? Which term is being used in these notable Slovenian major websites? and Slovenian company sites: and others Slovenian sites you might be aware of:
 * http://www.gzs.si/eng (Gospodarska Zbornica Slovenije)
 * http://www.nzs.si/2000/eng/index.htm (Nogometna Zveza Slovenije)
 * http:/www.elansports.com
 * http://www.krka.si/en/krka/predstavitev/
 * http://www.lek.si/eng/company-overview/
 * http://www.arnes.si/english
 * http://www.sloveniansoccer.net
 * http://www.jolandaceplak.com

Okay, FINALLY I found a major Slovenian website using the term Slovene--but only as a noun, Slovenian is used as an adjective:
 * http://www.slovenia-tourism.si/

But wait, another influential Slovenian website using the term Slovenian exclusively:
 * http://www.uni-lj.si/UoL/About/

Hmm.. the University of Ljubljana?? Indeed... :)

--BT 01:06 21 Jun 2003 (UTC) PS: Thanks for the info about this date function.
 * Yes, you can very easilly find the way to pick up so many arguments against adjective Slovene. They all might be wrong. Do not blame me if I insist what I have learnt at schools, which were not so bad after all. If I am doing such a disservice to my fellow citizens, then it is my education which fails. I really do not want to do any more harm to the recognition of Slovenes. About notable Slovene firms. This is just a pure chain reaction. Monkey does what monkey sees. Can you please give me one good link to definitive proof that Slovenian must be used from now on? And please learn the usage of Slovene too. It is not Gospodarska Zbornica Slovenije but Gospodarska zbornica Slovenije and also Nogometna zveza Slovenije. Who decide which term to use? English people or Slovene ones? I guess both. I know that Slovène is a French term for Slovene. But this is just a pure coincidence and we can not use it to argue about bad usage of adjective Slovene.

 * My definitive dictionary of English language which is "The Doubleday Dictionary", 1st Ed., Doubleday & Company, Inc., Garden City 1975, says:

 * Slovene noun One of a group of S Slavs now living in NW Yugoslavia (OK, this is a bit outdated, but nevertheless...). -- adjective Of or pertaining to the Slovenes or to their language. -- Slovenian adj., n.. (So here Slovenian is still in the second place...). I have no better dictionary. And I doubt there is any better one around.

 * A little bit newer one "Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English", 23rd Imp., Oxford UP, Oxford 1986 does not have Slovene or Slovenian at all. (Strangely but it has both Yugoslavian and Yugoslav). Should I buy some more new distionaries just to be sure how English is changing so rapidly? In this case in just around 30 years the usage of Slovene has changed to more proper one -- Slovenian, as you dictate. I doubt. Why is that so? Just because or there are any particular deeper reasons for this. You've said that you have explained this reasons clearly. I am pretty tired of arguing what is right and not. For me it is more interesting that in Slovene we have two forms which become translated in English as one. Slovene language slovenski jezik and Slovene slovenščina. In English we have to use adjective plus the word language. In Slovene adjective Slovene becomes also a noun, describing the language itself Slovene -- slovenščina. Please do not accuse me that I am doing some kind of harm to my fellow citizens because after all you may be wrong. I still believe that Slovenian should not be used in any of forms. Slovene is enough for both, adjective, and for noun. And not because they sound fine to me. I am not here to decide what is the best, but just to observe. And I hope that my great teacher of English is not turning in his grave for this. If you have time and will you can change adjectives and nouns Slovene all over the Wikipedia. I have not :-) And to learn some more about the usage of Slovene we can see at this address of the Society for Slovene Studies in Seattle, Washington, United States (and not some soccer organizations...):

But look at this page at the University of Alberta: http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/expressnews/articles/news.cfm?p_ID=411&s=a Looks like they are as confused as you. ;) BT 21:49 21 Jun 2003 (UTC) I am glad that someone outside the homeland is still using this term. You can write to them that they live in aberration if you want. Best regards. --XJamRastafire 19:46 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)
 * http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/~ljubljan/sss.html

I give you major Slovenian companies, major Slovenian websites, and even the UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA, and this is your response? You have facts staring you in the face and you just ignore them. You ingore what is important (e.g. you totally dismiss Slovenian being used EXCLUSIVELY on the websites of the University of Ljubljana, the most prominent Slovenian companies, the Chamber of Commerce of Slovenia, etc...) and instead emphasize insignificant things (on top of the many sites I provided there is listed--God forbid--a soccer site too).

How about MAJOR international institutions...will seeing which term they use help you accept that 'Slovene' is on the way out? Let's see here: First we have, the EUROPEAN UNION: Nah...that's not major. And a few of the many others:
 * http://europa.eu.int/abc/governments/others/index_en.html#Slovenia
 * http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/slovenia_e.htm (left column)
 * http://www.uefa.com
 * http://www.fifa.com

Anyway, I'm done arguing on this subject. Slovene and Slovenian are obviously both legal terms, but only the latter will become the undisputed standard. When even the University of Ljubljana uses Slovenian exclusively on its site (http://www.uni-lj.si), and the University of Maribor uses it to describe its mission, http://www.uni-mb.si/povezave/admin/sraka_media.asp?id=4999 maybe I'm right, no?

BT 21:45 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I have to agree with XJamRastafire on this one... every Slovene I've ever met (including my Slovene girlfriend) has used the word Slovene and not Slovenian. In fact, I stopped using the word Slovenian a while back because nobody I know uses it. Oh well. So, I would be borderline on this issue, but I agree with the move because of the google factor. --Chuck SMITH

Chuck, I am not disputing that Slovenians raised in Slovenia were taught in their schools the term Slovene. I know this very well. However, have you ever met a native-English speaking Slovenian who used the term Slovene? Homeland Slovenians are still catching up to the rest of the world in terms of using the preferred English term (i.e. Slovenian) by the vast majority of people around the world (I again offer google.com web results as compelling evidence). Fortunately, however, XJamRastaFire is the only homeland Slovenian I have ever encountered who refuses to acknowledge that Slovene is becoming an archaic term.

To XJamRastafire: Seeing how both Slovene and Slovenian exist in our English dictionaries, and considering Slovenian is clearly increasingly common and already the immensely more popular term (certainly by virtually every native-English speaking Slovenian), I hope you understand the futility of your efforts in supporting Slovene. BT 01:26 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * BT don't you have any better work to do? Please, do not teach me that my purposes are just simple futilities. I just gave you what I know about these adjectives. And then you came and you do not want to argue at all. You just give some facts which google shows. All right, it is obvious that Slovenian is much more used nowadays in electronic media. I can't change this, yes. But as you're new herein you might be at least fair enough to discuss the subject first and then change everything that does not suit you. You still did not give me any explicit proof of some expert about this term. You say that I am the only homeland Slovene that you have ever encounteed. I do NOT refuse the adjective or noun Slovene becoming an archaic form. I've just said it is still more familiar to me (and you accused me that this is my own fashion...). And consider what have Zocky and Chuck said. I think that becoming Slovene an archaic form is your invention. Who says that? I still believe that both terms are equally relevant no matter of your pseudo grammatical examinations. How can you be so sure that Slovenian will become undisputed standard? Yes University of Ljubljana really uses Slovenian instead of Slovene. This has without no doubt surprised me. The Fran Ramovš Institute of Slovenian Language of Scientific Research Centre of Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts (ZRC-SAZU) also uses Slovenian. I guess they know why and I believe this might be the HARDEST proof that you might be right. Here's one excerption from the search of Slovene at their Corpus Laboratory:

 * "DELO, 22. julija 1999, sentence 774 in context:"
 * "Naslednja beseda je »Slovene« (izgovori se podobno kot kratica za Slovenija-vino »Slovin«), ki se razlaga kot slovenski, slovenščina, Slovenec. Oxford Dictionary v Microsoftovi Encarti pa pozna tudi za nas daleč boljšo in primernejšo obliko »Slovenian« namesto dvoumnega »Slovene«. Tudi Komac-Škerlj: Slovene(!) English Modern Dictionary navaja poleg »Slovene« tudi »Slovenian«, vendar se o priporočeni obliki ne izreka, kar se mi zdi slabo. Vsekakor bi morali dati prednost obliki »Slovenian«, kadar prevajamo pridevnik »slovenski«, morda celo takrat, ko govorimo o narodnosti."
 * Trans: (The next word is »Slovene« ( it is pronounced similar as an abbreviation for Slovenia-vino »Slovin«), and is explained as Slovene, Slovene language, Slovene -- a native). Oxford Dictionary in Microsoft Encarta knows for us far better and more convenient form of »Slovenian« instead of ambiguous »Slovene«. Also Komac-Škerlj: Slovene(!) English Modern Dictionary alleges beside »Slovene« also »Slovenian«, but it does not declare for the recommended form, what is bad for me. By all means we should preferentially use the form »Slovenian« when we translate the adjective »Slovenian« and perhaps even then when we talk about nationality.)

 * The search of Slovene gives 'just' 42 and of Slovenian gives 242 words. So again Slovenian wins. Another one:

 * "Za Slovence v Pensilvaniji se formalno uporabljajo izrazi "Slovenian, Slovene and Windish". Prva dva se uporabljata izmenično, enakovredno, medtem ko se izraz "Windish" uporablja skoraj izključno za Slovence iz Prekmurja, ki živijo v Bethlehemu v Pensilvaniji."
 * Trans: (For Slovenes in Pennsylvania terms of "Slovenian, Slovene and Windish" are used. First two are used in turn, equally, meanwhile the term "Windish" is used almost exclusively for Slovenes from the Transmuraland (Prekmurje), who live in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania).

 * What do you mean that Slovenes are still catching up to the rest of the world? The simple answer to this was given by Chuck who said that he never meet noone who uses Slovenian. I am not disregarding the links you gave about Slovene companies. I have them in mind. But I believe that you're one of those funny quibblers who would spend the whole day trying to persuade such the unbelievers as I AM. On the other side you do not consider the facts I gave you from those great English dictionaries (You can also check about the Doubleday Dictionary at google if you want. It is mentioned many times as a good resource). In my opinion English dictionaries are still more relevant than the entire internet. Another fact is this: "Veliki angleško-slovenski slovar" of authors Grad, Škerlj, Vitorovič from 1997 uses both terms, but it has Slovenian as a noun just for the language slovenščina not for the natives Slovenec. So where did you find that Slovenian should also be used as a noun for natives? Just on the net? Please, check some other dictionaries if you have them... Anton Grad's "English-Slovene dictionary" from 1965 has both terms as adjective and as noun on the other side, but he chose the fist one for the name of the dictionary -- not "English-Slovenian dictionary"... I think that as you've already changed so many adjectives and nouns to your definitive form, you haven't done much. If I follow you I have to use Cilli instead of Celje, since I haven't met no native English speaker who uses Celje and so on, and so on. The same with Carinthia|Karantania and such. Thank you anyway for your insignificant service. And finally not to forget. I think that we still in the relevance to Slovene/Slovenian have to distinguish between American English and British English -- but, no, you're throwing everything in one basket. But, hey I am not confused -- you are. I simply use just one term -- Slovene, and you use another one and teach other to use the same... Continue in this way and you'll get very far. Leave behind all those crazy bad ass mother XJams :-) Best regards. --XJamRastafire 22:18 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

A Call For All Slovenians (and others) To Take Notice ***draft***
Slovenian is the dominant term internationally and only increasing in popularity.

The University of Ljubljana (http://www.uni-lj.si/UoL/About/) and University of Maribor (http://www.uni-mb.si/dokument.aspx?id=8175) both favour 'Slovenian' on their websites. The Slovenian Philharmonic (http://www.filharmonija.si/), the Slovenian Tourist Board (http://www.slovenia-tourism.si/), and the Slovenian Intellectual Property Office (http://www.uil-sipo.si/) are all official names of prominent Slovenian organizations.

The major Slovenian associations in all English speaking countries outside of UK have been using Slovenian exclusively for many years. For example:

http://www.cdnslocc.ca/ (Canadian Slovenian Chamber of Commerce) http://www.sloaus-inst.com/ (Slovenian Australian Institute) http://www.glasslovenije.com.au/sns-victoria.htm (Australian Slovenian network) [Can't find links for the Slovenian-American major organizations, but I know they use 'Slovenian' exclusively]

The Slovenian Chamber of Commerce (http://www.gzs.si/eng/) and most Slovenian companies (at least those that do international business) employ the term 'Slovenian' exclusively. So do the Olympics organization (www.athens2004.com), UEFA, and most other international organizations.

In the UK, 'Slovenian' is just now catching on. But today, even the British embassy in Slovenia is using 'Slovenian' regularly on their website. The BBC regularly uses the term 'Slovenian', and Eurosport almost always uses it. http://www.britishembassy.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1050510813607 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/1412177.stm

Old stuff
Like the article, this talk page seems to be full of long meandering paragraphs that go a million places at once and end up being nearly incomprehensible.

However, the question of whether this article should be at Slovene language or Slovenian language remains. I think we have to put our personal preferences for one term or the other aside and look to Wikipedia policy: Naming conventions (common names), which says:

 * Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things. ...

 * When choosing a name for a page ask yourself: What word would the average user of the Wikipedia put into the search engine?

 * The Wikipedia is not a place to advocate a title change in order to reflect recent scholarship. The articles themselves reflect recent scholarship but the titles should represent common usage.

Given that, the short answer is that this article should be on the page with the name that represents the "common name", i.e. the one that is used most often. There is already evidence on this page that points to "Slovenian" being more common, but I thought I would add one more:. According to Google, instances of "Slovenian" on the web outnumber "Slovene" by more than 10 to 1. People looking for an article on the Slovenian language are probably 10 times more likely to have encountered Slovenian than Slovene, and it is for this reason, and this reason alone that the page should be there. Nohat 17:28, 2004 Mar 13 (UTC)

 * The Wikipedia Manual of Style states the following: "If all else fails, consider following the spelling style preferred by the first major contributor (i.e., not a stub) to the article who used a word with variant spellings in the article or the title." (my emphasis)
 * Slovenian refers to things other than the language per se, and a Google search is really not conclusive evidence on usage. Since there does not appear to be consensus on which name to actually use, and given that the article uses 'Slovene' (along with British English) in it in most cases, and that the first author to have written about it used 'Slovene language', I reckon it ought to be at Slovene language. Besides, Slovenian language links back to Slovene language, so anyone using that in the search form will get to the desired destination. Sinuhe 17:41, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, a Google search of "Slovenian language" vs. "Slovene language" still comes out 3 to 1 in favor of "Slovenian" . And the quotation you give from the Manual of Style concerns article contents, not titles. I think that if you can present evidence that "Slovene" is preferred to "Slovenian" by Slovenians themselves, then that would be a good argument for using "Slovene". However, barring such conclusive evidence, I don't see that any test other than majority of references is preferable for determining an article's name. Nohat 18:29, 2004 Mar 13 (UTC)

 * Actually, the quote explicitely states or the title (marked bold above), so it should refer to article titles as well. As for common usage: searching for Slovene vs Slovenian on British websites is in favour of the former. I do not see how one may assess real usage of the word – that is, usage as appears in printed publications and as is actually spoken. A Google search for this purpose is irrelevant. Perhaps a noteworthy reference might be the only full English grammar of Slovene, Professor Peter Herrity's Slovene: A Comprehensive Grammar, which uses 'Slovene' in its name, as do most other works concentrating on the language in itself (Colloquial Slovene; A Basic Reference Grammar of Slovene; etc).
 * Besides, the article was moved in the first place by someone who appears to have been on a crusade to change all references from 'Slovene' to 'Slovenian' throughout Wikipedia for no apparent reason (given that both terms are equally valid). To move it back is then rightly justified: if for no other reason simply to invalidate the curious original move. Sinuhe 19:48, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Try this one and think about it a little bit more. The same thing is with searching within .uk pages. Well, that someone was BT some months ago. --XJamRastafire 02:03, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm not advocating changing all references to Slovenes to Slovenian. I'm just saying that, in English, as spoken all over the world, the term "Slovenian" is more commonly used to describe the language than "Slovene", and I think that is borne out by the references I made above.

 * I think Google searches are indeed the most relevant kind of evidence we can use—the Google database is undoubtedly the largest corpus of English texts that we have access to. Furthermore, the Google database is contemporary—as most of what's on the internet was written in the last 10 years, it reflects current usage, and not historical usage.

 * I think it is clear that the Wikipedia policy to follow the original author's spelling is intended only as a last resort, as one that should only be heeded if all other evidence points to an equal distribution between the two disputed usages. I don't think we've yet reached that point.

 * You argue that the titles of books make a strong argument about what we should call the language. I don't think that's true, but even so, there are plenty of books that use the name "Slovenian" in the title:
 * Morpho-syntactic expansions in translation from English into Slovenian as a prototypical response to the complexity of the original by Milena Milojevic Sheppard
 * Talk Now! Slovenian by EuroTalk
 * The evolution of vocabulary in literary Slovenian by Károly Gadányi
 * Business Slovenian Dictionary: English-Slovenian/Slovenian-English by Peter Collin Publishing

 * On the issue of British usage, it does seem clear that the British prefer "Slovene", but it seems like folly to follow the British usage simply because it's British. The whole Google database represents English as it is written all over the world; why limit your search just to the UK? And indeed, Prof. Herrity is from Britain, so it seems sensible that he would use the name most commonly used there. But there are a far greater number of English speakers outside of Britain than within, and Wikipedia should reflect global preferences, not provincial ones.

 * While I think we agree "Slovene" is the British term, I don't think there is evidence that "Slovenian" is therefore the American term, as English is used in many other countries, like Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and India. If you do country-specific searches on google for "slovene" and "slovenian" for .au, .ca, .nz, and .in as you did for .uk, you'll find that in each case "slovenian" outnumbers "slovene". As the other searches show that "Slovenian" is more common, not only in the US, but in other English-speaking countries, I think it is clear that in the broader English-speaking world, as a whole, "Slovenian" is the more common term, and I think that provides further strong support for having the article at "Slovenian language". However, if the article's title is going to kowtow to British usage, it can at least say that "Slovene" is the British term, and "Slovenian" is used most everywhere else English is spoken.

 * Nohat 04:04, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)

 * Slovene is the older term that had been used in Britain and elsewhere for some time; Slovenes living in the USA, however, moved to changed to word to 'Slovenian', and apparently it has spread. Originally, then, Slovenian was most certainly an American usage, not an International English one. But perhaps the article should contain a bit of history on the actual name of the language in the section discussing it somewhat now already.

 * The reason why the article should be entitled Slovene language is also because the entire article is written in British English, not American, and it would, I should reckon, appear rather queer for a British English article to bear an American title. Especially so since 'Slovenian language' properly redirects to this article, so if anyone should type it thus, the destination would be reached regardless ... Sinuhe 13:23, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * "Slovene is the older term that had been used in Britain and elsewhere for some time" This is completely untrue. The oldest quotation the Oxford English Dictionary has for "Slovene" is 1883, whereas the oldest for "Slovenian" is 1844, fully 43 years earlier. I think then it is fair to conclude that "Slovenian" is the older term. Secondly, the 1844 quotation for "Slovenian" is from the "Philological Society", which is a British organization, not an American one. I have yet to see any evidence that "Slovenian" is in any way distinctly American, and as I showed before, "Slovenian" is preferred in many English-speaking countries, not just the US.

 * While the argument that the article is written in British English has some merit, as the articles includes the spellings "spelt" and "favour", it includes non-Britishisms, such as the use of the word "Slavic" instead of "Slavonic", "while" instead of "whilst", and references to American geography, as in the discussion of how Massachussetts is spelled in Slovenian.

 * I don't think if the article were called "Slovenian language" it would be a case of a British English article bearing an American title. I have already demonstrated that "Slovenian" is not exclusively American, that it was original a British usage, and that the article isn't even strictly in British English. Furthermore, since it's not a question of British vs. American, it seems that the best thing to do would be to give the article the title that most speakers of English would expect, which in this case would be Slovenian language.

 * Finally, I am uncomfortable with your use of the word "queer", both here and in the article. It has a pejorative connotation and use of the word as a simple synonym for "odd" or "strange" is likely to confuse, mislead, or offend. Nohat 00:14, 2004 Mar 17 (UTC)

 * I was not referring to the age of the word as such, but rather of the usage. Slovene was the older use in Britain and colonies, and Slovenian has crept back in these last years owing to American influence.

 * The words Slavic and while are not American or indeed specific to any kind of English; what is more, the COD claims that 'Slavonic' is an alternative (but by no means specifically British at that) term for 'Slavic', with the main description at 'Slavic'. 'Whilst' is a somewhat more formal (and dialectical in parts of Britain) word for 'while', which is a neutral – and often the preferable – word. Both words commonly appear in British text.
 * The article naturally contains many references to various other cultures: but can you claim it is, for example, Indonesian because it discusses 'Djakarta'? How does discussing something that is not in connexion with Britain render the article not British in terms of English? Not only word spellings (spelt, favour, centre, localisation to name but a few, and many more in the Slovene grammar article), but also capitalisation and word choice (including collocation) are decisively British!

 * That there should be an article named one way, but using another term throughout its contents (Slovene for the most part) seems absurd to me, however if you decide to move it back, I shall not attempt to revert the change.

 * As for your understanding of the word 'queer' as I have used it: I apologise if this was mistaken for something not meant to have been implied. The alternative use of the word is colloquial (perchance slang, I am not certain about it), so it did not occur to me that it could be misinterpreted in a formal context. Then again, what one makes of a word is but a personal rendition, a conjecture in a way; anyone who finds it offensive will no longer do so upon deciding wilfully that it confers no ill will or malice. Feel free to change it if you like ('curious' seems like a quite melodious alternative, for example!). Sinuhe 12:31, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * 'Slovenian' is scarcely the internationally preferred term. I personally, and all of my acquaintances in Britain, have only ever used 'Slovene' as the adjective. It is favoured in British publications (for example, Prof Herrity's 'Slovene grammar') and in most dictionaries. According to the style guide, the original author's brand of English and therefore such terminology ought to be respected; if you could please stop your arbitrary crusade against the perfectly proper term 'Slovene', it would be much appreciated. —Sinuhe 19:27, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Scarcely? A simple search on the Internet will quash your conjecture. Indeed, over 2 million yahoo/google results for 'Slovenian' and a mere 250 thousand for 'Slovene'. A search on even the European Union's site has the same result: under 2000 document matches for 'Slovene', over 10,000 matches for 'Slovenian'!

Not only is it heavily favoured internationally, 'Slovenian' is the exclusive term used by the vast majority of Slovenian companies, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Slovenia (www.gzs.si/eng), the Slovenian Intellectual Property Office (www.uil-sipo.si), the Slovenian Philharmonic (www.filharmonija.si), and so on.

Both the University of Ljubljana and University of Maribor use 'Slovenian' (mostly) on their websites, as does the 'Slovenian Tourist Board (www.slovenia-tourism.si), while the Government of Slovenia unfortunately still uses both 'Slovenian' and 'Slovene' interchangeably.

Even most British newspapers today use 'Slovenian' (refer to www.wn.com). Virtually all Americans, Canadians, and Australians use 'Slovenian' exclusively, and so do FIFA, UEFA, and virtually every other major international organisation now.

With respect to the style guide, "stating that the original author's brand of English and therefore such terminology ought to be respected," I do not believe this case applies because the use of 'Slovene' negatively affects Slovenians such as myself. With enough people confusing Slovenia with Slovakia and Slavonia, those who support a clearly less popular and, in fact, dying term only make matters worse. --BT

 * Look, we have had this discussion before. A Google search is not conducive to real-life usage. It may be that you prefer Slovenian as opposed to Slovene, but this does not automatically make it the internationally preferred variant, but merely on the Internet, in particular websites written in American English. It is a valid form regardless of your attitude towards it.

Of course Google and Yahoo are conducive to real-life usage. It is a fact that 'Slovenian' is the absolute dominant term internationally. In Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States, the term 'Slovene' is virtually NEVER used.

 * In fact, using your methodology, a Google search on Slovene websites (.si) appears to show more hits for Slovene than Slovenian, as does one on British websites (.uk). Still, this demonstrates little and has no useful value. The Oxford English Dictionary, which is based on a large corpus of written and spoken material, favours Slovene, as do all other recent British dictionaries.

The forgotten Oxford English Dictionary has little or no useful value here. How can you weigh one dictionary against world opinion and common practice? --BT

 * Why would you assume that wn.com is a British newspaper? It is neither a newspaper, nor is it British; its headquarters are in New York. It uses American spellings throughout. It should not be surprising, then, that they prefer Slovenian to Slovene (although their website, as far as I can tell, features both terms) and Slovak to Slovakian.

Why would you assume that I assumed wn.com was a British newspaper? World News is a search engine of thousands of international newspapers--including British ones. The Guardian, The Mirror, The Daily Record... they all have employed use of the term 'Slovenian' in recent articles. Seeing the big picture now? --BT

 * In the end, even if Slovenian seems to be marginally more popular on the Internet, this by no means allows you to change every instance of the term of which you are obviously not very fond. It is other people's prerogative to use the term they fancy, and, considering that it is not a misspelt word, but a perfectly valid and recognised form, it should be left intact in accordance with the Manual of Style. Provided, of course, that it does not cause inconsistency and that it fits in the general theme. Whilst I agree that using Slovene in an article about the American melting-pot might not be entirely appropriate if the rest of the article was written in American English, it is perfectly acceptable elsewhere, especially so if so written by the original author of any given article.

You are dreaming if you think 'Slovenian' is only marginally more popular than 'Slovene'. Being ten times more common is an example of pure dominance. Further, 'Slovenian' is not an American term. It's the internationally preferred term. Is even becoming slowly but surely more commonly used in the UK. In the rest of the world, it is the dominant term already and has been for many years. In ten years, 'Slovenian' will surpass 'Slovene' in usage even in the UK. --BT

 * Quite honestly, I do not care how using the term Slovene affects you; it is certainly the preferred form of many other Slovenes – in fact, so far, I only know of you who seems to be displeased by it. Myself, I gasp in shock why anyone should want to use the Americanised spelling, and am therefore negatively affected by Slovenian. Either form may displease some, but since both are correct, you must not change them all to the one to your liking. It would be just like changing all instances of manoeuvre to maneuver because a Google search gives more hits for the latter; something which you are not allowed to do in Wikipedia. —Sinuhe 08:10, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Very weak. I already explained why those supporting a clearly less popular and dying term negatively impact Slovenians. What is your purpose for bringing up manoeuvre and maneuver again? Who does this affect? 'Slovene' is not to my liking. It is the internationally favoured term. I honestly could accept either one, but only one. --BT

Title change, again
The current text is ridiculous, and factually incorrect. For example, it says the language is officially regulated by the "Slovene Academy of Sciences and Arts", website at sazu.si, but when one visits sazu.si, one can plainly see that the Academy's name is given on their own website as the "Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts". As "Slovenian" is both the more common usage in English and the usage preferred by the official Academy regulating the language, I see no reason to use "Slovene". At the very least the Academy's name should not be misreported. --Delirium 22:54, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

After re-reading this debate, it comes down to this:

Arguments in favor of 'Slovenian'
 * 'Slovenian' has by far the vast majority of Google references ( aratio of more than 10 to 1)
 * 'Slovenian' is used in the English names of many Slovenian organizations.
 * 'Slovenian' is preferred in documents on the European Union's web site (by a ratio of more than 5 to 1)
 * 'Slovenian' is the preferred term in every English-speaking country other than Britain.
 * 'Slovenian' is the name with the longest history in English.

Arguments in favor of 'Slovene'
 * 'Slovene' is the spelling used by the original author of the article.
 * 'Slovene' is the preferred spelling in Britain.
 * 'Slovenes' is more often used, according to Google, than 'Slovenians'.

It seems to me, that not only are the arguments in favor of 'Slovenian' more plentiful, but they reflect a broader worldview. Sinuhe, in essence, is arguing that because he was the original author, the contents of the article should forever be written using a regionalism rather than a broadly accepted international standard. This seems not only selfish and closed-minded, but fundamentally contrary to the goals of Wikipedia. Nohat 23:55, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've only just had my attention drawn to this discussion, but just to throw in my €0.02...
 * The observation above that the "Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts" calls itself "Slovenian" rather than "Slovene" is irrelevant when you're discussing the name of the language. Plenty of languages use different names for a country's language and its inhabitants.
 * On this page where the European Union defines the list of its official languages, the EU explicitly demonstrates that for its purposes the English name of the language of Slovenia is "Slovene". -- Arwel 01:28, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * On the first point, I don't think there is any evidence that Slovene/Slovenian are distinguished based on reference to the people or the language. It may be true for other peoples/languages, but there is no evidence it's true for Slovene/Slovenian. In particular, the specific organization that appears to be the major publisher of Slovenian language-related materials calls itself the "The Fran Ramovš Institute Of Slovenian Language", as linked to from the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts' main page.

 * On the second, I will grant that while this may be damning to the single point about EU usage, it is not damning to the point overall about Slovenian, and in retrospect is unsurprising as the English-speaking member of the EU is the UK, who comprises the singular exception to global preference for Slovenian to Slovene. The other points stand, and the evidence demonstrating an overall global preference for "Slovenian" is paramount. Nohat 01:58, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * To weaken your point a little, I would draw the existence of Ireland within the EU to your attention... -- Arwel 02:24, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * These nitpicking points are not really relevant. The reality is that "Slovenian" is is preferred in all English-speaking countries other than Britain. Including Ireland . I regret ever having mentioned the EU (I was just referring to BT's earlier reasearch) because the reality is that what the EU calls a language is irrelevant to what we should call the language. Do you actually have a point, or are you just here to nitpick? Nohat 04:43, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I am not the original author of the article – what in the world could have given you that impression? However, the original author did use the term Slovene.
 * That '"Slovenian" is used in the English names of many Slovenian organizations.' is true, but at the same time, Slovene is used in the English names of many organisations in Slovenia. The two seem to be more or less equally represented in such names.
 * The SAZU's official name is in Slovene. There is no official English name, so the English translation can utilise either Slovene or Slovenian. The translator of their website apparently preferred the latter, but this is scarcely relevant.
 * And, Nohat, who are you to say what the goals of Wikipedia are, or that keeping spelling diverse (as suggested in the style guide) is not one of them?
 * —Sinuhe 17:20, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I haven't seen any examples yet of Slovenian organizations using "Slovene", and if there are, how many of them are not somehow British and how many of them are referring in particular to the language? Certainly "The Fran Ramovš Institute Of Slovenian Language", publishers of Slovenian dictionaries and grammars, use "Slovenian" in reference to the language. Second, the argument that it is scarcely relevant that the official website of SAZU calls itself "Slovenian" is ridiculous. It's the official web site, and it's in English! And it says "Slovenian"! Just because it's contrary to your preferred usage doesn't make it irrelevant.

 * The primary goal of Wikipedia is to provide as much information to as many people as possible, and insisting on using a rare regionalism over an internationally-accepted form is contrary to that goal. If you ask any reasonable Wikipedian, you will find that they will all agree that if the goal of providing accessible information conflicts with the supposed "goal" of keeping spelling diverse, then we should err on the side of accessibility rather than diverse spelling.

 * And finally, regardless of who originally wrote the article, you are the only one who is insisting on calling it "Slovene", contrary to the vast majority of international English usage. Nohat 18:14, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Please note that all this only happens because of an apparent nation-state policy. People are more likely to let the changes be rolled in if they are done with a rationale, some tact and frankness about the motives, and so far we've seen too little of this. --Joy [shallot]   13:35, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

long and short form
An analogous discussion (or the same discussion according to some), happened on Talk:Slovenians.

There wasn't much result, other than that BT2 continued to change all instances of the short form to the long form (e.g. most of Special:Contributions/BT2), and I continued to revert some specific ones (e.g. Istria, Counts of Celje). --Joy [shallot]

Since no one seems to be seriously contesting the move to Slovenian language, I will make the move on Sunday, October 10 after 2PM PST. (Approximately 24 hours from this posting). Nohat 20:23, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I think that this page has already been moved once or even twice to this current name. Crocheting about international preferred term "Slovenian" is infant and useless. Why then 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica and Online version both have "Slovene language". And do not tell me it is just a British English term.. Many of you were talking what Wikipedia should be and what are its goals, but you have done quite huge damage to the language itself. Which language now? Slovene language, for god's sake. I do not know why the most prominent instutute in Slovenia for the language (The Fran Ramovš Institute Of Slovenian Language) bears English name with Slovenian and also the SAZU? And why British Philological Society in 1844 used a term "Slovenian" instead of "Slovene"? Why the rest of the world should call this language Slovenian, and in EU Slovene? I do not see no sense in this. I've been working in Wikipedia actively at least two years and this problem is still going on. Nohat thinks (or others) that he would solve it with simple redirection or with some statistical facts from Google or whatever. We should also consider the history of English term, not just a modern (international) one. Slovene language was formed in 6th century not in 19th and I guess that there must exist even earlier terms for it in English. As I work here in Wikipedia I thought that these kinds of problems (simple naming of one language in English and so on) can be solved. But I see they can't. So, just to let know all the readers of Wikipedia that this pretty simple problem is not solved. In spite of the above strange 'call'. Its solution is now forced and I hope that some day it should be solved properly. And of course I congratulate Sinuhe for the work he had put in creating the article!! Best regards. --XJamRastafire 16:37, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Protection
I have protected this page because of the vandalism of self-pleasing of some authors - specially BT2. --xJaM 15:10, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I can't see anything in the recent history that constitutes vandalism. Can you be more specific?  —Michael Z. 2005-06-2 15:26 Z

 * It is a quite long story and I guess someone has to do something. I have no time nor motivation to do so - without help of other users. The page has been moved and reverted several times. I am not a professional linguist but a term 'Slovenian language' seems to be inappropriate and so on. Some think that "Slovenian" is internationally preferred, but most probably is just related to the modern state of Slovenia, not to the nation of Slovenes itself. I hope this is a little bit more specific, but I am afraid that this problem should already be solved in this huge project as Wikipedia is. Best regards. --xJaM 16:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * We've been through this before but "seems to be inappropriate and so on" is not a valid argument—in fact it's not an argument at all. Given the evidence of usage, Wikipedia policy supports keeping this article at "Slovenian language". Please do not move the article again unless you can show consensus support for keeping it at "Slovene language". Nohat 16:45, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In my opinion, Slovenian and Slovene can both be used here on Wikipedia no matter what context, as British and American English are not prefered one over the other. I don't see any reasonable argument to use one or the other form. --Eleassar777 17:03, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Slovenian is used extensively in Britain . This is not a case of British vs American usage—it's a case of common name vs uncommon name. See above. Nohat 17:11, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Nohat, can you show me where Wikipedia supports keeping this article at this current name? I haven't found it and I think that only a small group of users here supports it. In fact my argument as was written is pretty strong. But as I wrote I am not a professional linguist and I can't deal this problem alone and against this small 'group'. Calling something "Slovenian" is just like naming NASA NESA - for example, if I may be little picturesque. The whole project of Wikipedia is great, but having articles with (just) an adjective "Slovenian" makes a big black spot on it. Sorry if you do not understand. And finally tell what can I do that this article should be named properly? On which instance, or page or whatever? Should I complain? But to whom? I won't quit so easily, because I know I am right. Soon or later. I would like to write articles and I have to argue with bunch of polymaths and waste my precious Time. --xJaM 22:10, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * This debate (Are people from Slovenia called Slovenes or Slovenians?) might also help to 'solve' this 'problem'. --xJaM 22:41, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * You're not really making any sense. "Slovenian" is an ordinary English word used to describe both the people of Slovenia as well as the language they speak. It is a perfectly regular English word that can be used as an adjective or a noun. There are many, many other examples of words like this in English: Lithuanian, Russian, Italian, Latvian, Macedonian, Malaysian, Hungarian, Hawaiian, Romanian, and so on. It is true that there is also a word "Slovene" which serves this purpose, but "Slovenian" is commonly used everywhere English is spoken and is the more commonly used term overall, which is why Wikipedia policy supports using that term over others. See Naming conventions (common names). This is not about whether the people of Slovenia should be called "Slovenes" or "Slovenians", but whether the language is called "Slovenian" or "Slovene". All the evidence I have pointed to shows that yes, both terms are used, but "Slovenian" is much more common overall. Nohat 23:07, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I do understand perfectly about ordinary usage of the word 'Slovenian'. In fact I do make a lot of sense. You do not have an evidence (or a proof - referencing to Google is simply not enough...) that  'Slovenian' is much more common overall. One of good policies here is also that original namings (if they are correct) remains - but this is not the case here, because some later users (including you) are changing and rearranging terms. If you have seen that this issue is a problem, you should reach the consesus about it - but there was none (yet). Currently I do not have references to show how a word "Slovene" came to English, but think of the nation. It is known at least since 6th century BC and I guess that English people must have come to contact with it after some time (let us say in 10 or 11th century) - and a question is what word did they use to name the nation. Somewhere (as I recall) you've said that the word 'Slovenian' is older than "Slovene" in English dictionaries - but is this really true? As far as I am aware of, the majority of modern English dictionaries allow equally both terms. Until we do not solve this problem, futher workings will be very difficult. And please use a little bit more nevtral or impartial sound of your language/speech (in fact it's not an argument at all, You're not really making any sense, ...) because we are equal in this manner. --xJaM 10:37, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The Oxford English Dictionary contains dated quotations of English that go back more than a thousand years to track the history of English usage.
 * The oldest quotation the Oxford English Dictionary has for "Slovene" is 1883, whereas the oldest for "Slovenian" is 1844, fully 43 years earlier. I think then it is fair to conclude that "Slovenian" is the older term. Secondly, the 1844 quotation for "Slovenian" is from the "Philological Society", which is a British organization, not an American one. I have yet to see any evidence that "Slovenian" is in any way distinctly American, and as I showed before, "Slovenian" is preferred in many English-speaking countries, not just the US.
 * Secondly, references to Google are the only reasonable way to show which form enjoys a preponderance of usage. Google shows that usage of Slovenian far outnumbers Slovene overall. This is the only empirical evidence which has been presented in this matter. It is true that a Google evidence is not perfect evidence, but unless you can show that this particular evidence is deeply flawed in some way, you cannot simply wave the evidence away by saying it's "not enough".
 * Last, perhaps you can explain why it is that you dislike the term "Slovenian" so much. My reasons for preferring it is because it is the most common name for the language in English and we do a disservice to our readers by insisting upon using a less common name, because fewer people will be familiar with it. That is the reasoning behind the "common names" policy and I think it's a sound and reasonable approach to naming. On the other hand, the only thing going for "Slovene" is that there is a slight majority of usage in the UK. On balance, the fact that in one (and only one) English-speaking country "Slovene" has a slight majority of usage, compared to the fact that in all other English-speaking countries "Slovenian" has a majority of usage, and in fact overall has a dramatic majority usage, the argument for "Slovene" seems pretty weak and unconvincing. Given the evidence that we have, "Slovenian" is both older and more common. What evidence is there that supports preferring "Slovene" other than the fact that you like it? Nohat 16:01, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Also, I add that even sites in Slovenia prefer "Slovenian" to "Slovene" . Nohat 16:10, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)