Diskussion:Österbotten

Defekter Weblink

• http://www.vaestorekisterikeskus.fi/vrk/files.nsf/files/31E00479D0DCDBE5C225757C00444ECB/$file/Asukasluku_2008_2009.htm (Internet Archive)

– GiftBot (Diskussion) 16:38, 9. Okt. 2012 (CEST)

Die Name des Artikels

Ich schreibe jetzt auf Englisch weil es geht scheller und besser so. Sie können aber gern auch auf Deutsch antworten. Ich lese Deutsch sehr gut aber schreibe nicht so gut.

So, as far as I can understand, the name of the historical province should be in german "Pohjanmaa", because the vast majority of the area as well as the population of the historical province is finnish-speaking. (As well as there are Uusimaa and not "Nyland]], and Varsinais-Suomi and not "Egentliga Finland" and Åland and not "Ahvenanmaa" - Every province of course has as well finnish and swedish name, and some also have german.)

While, however of course, the name of the present day province in german should be "Österbotten", because the vast majority of the population and the area of the present day province is swedish-speaking.

But if you wish to handle the both in the same article, I don't know how it is possible. - For of course the present day province and the historical province at least in this case are two completely different things, allthough they happen to have the same name. - While however the areas of these two are totally different, as can be seen from the maps in the article.

And also in Finnish and Swedish in Wikipedia these two are called with different names and handled in two different articles, as they - of course - are two totally different things: fi:Pohjanmaan maakunta vs. fi:Pohjanmaa and sv:Österbotten (historiskt landskap) vs. sv:Österbotten. - That is, in Swedish language speechcommunity the name "Österbotten" means primarily the present day province, and the naming of the the historical province needs further explanation; while in Finnish language speech community the name "Pohjanmaa" means primarily the historical province, and the naming the present day province needs further explanation. (As well as, for example, "Satakunta" or "Satakunda" and "Uusimaa" or "Nyland" in both languages tend to mean the present day province, and the historical province needs further explanation; while however "Häme" or "Tavastland" in both languages tend to mean the historical province, because there is no present day province with exactly that name, etc.)

And in the same manner, of course there should (or should there?) be something with Pohjanmaa or pohjanmaa and not Nordösterbotten and Südösterbotten because in these provinces there are no Swedish speaking areas; as well as you do not have "Ahvenanmaa" but Åland, because in Åland there are no Finnish speaking areas. And you have Varsinais-Suomi and Uusimaa but not "Egentliga Finlad" or "Nyland" because the majority language of these bilingual provinces is Finnish. And you have Österbotten (the present day province) and not "Pohjanmaan maakunta", because the majority language of this bilingual province is Swedish. As well as there should (or should there?) be something with pohjanmaa or Pohjanmaa and not "Mittelösterbotten", because the majority language of this bilingual province is Finnish (if I remember right).

So, was meinen Sie? Is this argument right or wrong? --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 22:13, 16. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

But of course, if in german language sources outside the Wikipedia the names are used in this manner, then of course the german language wikipedia must follow the practice of the german language speech community in general. But how it is, I dont know. --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 22:16, 16. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

And finally, when searching with google, this slightly seems to be the case, allthough there are some hits for both. But if you travel by train in Finland, they will say in english, finnish and swedish: "Seuraavana Karjaa, Nästa Karis, The next stop Karis", according the majority language. But maybe the situation in this case is so hard to figure out that the german language speech community has adopted a practice that is against this general international rule regarding the use of place names of bilingual areas or bilingual countries in a foreign-language context. --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 22:29, 16. Sep. 2013 (CEST)