Talk:Danzig crisis (1932)

Danzig or Gdańsk crisis?

For the moment, I translated this article (with a great deal help from Google) from Polish into English, which is why it is called the Gdańsk crisis. Anyone familiar with the history articles around here will be aware of the intense debates about whatever to call the former German cities in Poland by their current Polish names or the former German names. Hence the arguments around here whatever to use the names Gdańsk or Danzig, Wrocław or Breslau, Poznań or Posen, Szczecin or Stettin and so fourth and so fourth. Personally, I favor using the name that is most historically accurate. To use an example, with the former capital and second city of Russia, it should be called St. Petersburg from 1703-1914, Petrograd in the years 1914-1924, Leningrad in the years 1924-1991 and St. Petersburg again from 1991 onward. Likewise, the city that has named Istanbul since 1924 should be referred to as Constantinople in the centuries 330-1924, and Byzantium in the centuries before. It is just weird using the modern names for cities in former periods of time and I find it rather jarring. I have no sympathy with irredentism or revanchism.

Personally, I believe the frontiers should be in accordance with the wishes of the majority living in the territory in question. It is my understanding that the vast majority of people living today in Gdańsk are Polish and wish to remain Polish, and therefore their wishes should be respected. The fact the city used to be called Danzig and was 90% German is irrelevant to the modern status of Gdańsk. The Oder-Neisse line is the internationally recognized frontier between Germany and Poland, and I see no reason why it should be changed. This is my view, but past ownership of a territory is not a valid reason for changing the frontiers. The eastern part of the United States, Ireland, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, Hong Kong and too many other territories to list here all once belonged to the British Empire, but it does not logically follow that the United Kingdom has the "right" to take back all the parts of the world that were once colored red on the map. The Indian city of Mumbai was once called Bombay under the Raj-so writing about the city during the Raj, the name Bombay should be used because it is is absurdly anachronistic to use the name Mumbai, which the city was renamed in 1995. I favor the name Danzig in the centuries between 1308-1945 because it is the most historically accurate name. In the same way, the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius was once the Polish city of Wilno, and the Ukrainian city of Lviv was once the Polish city of Lwów. For contemporary usage, Vilnius and Lviv are the correct terms, but writing about those cities when they were part of Poland, I prefer Wilno and Lwów. An exception might be Saigon, which was renamed Ho Chi Minh City in 1975. People in Vietnam still call it Saigon as the name Ho Chi Minh City has never caught on. The same is true of Bombay-despite the name change in 1995, most of the people from the city still call it Bombay. The name change was due to a Hitler-admiring Hindu fundamentalist named Bal Thackeray who claimed the name Bombay was a British name that was insulting to Indians. Thackeray's Shiv Sena Party controlled the state government of Maharashtra owning to its support in rural areas, not in the city. But in both these cases, the people in the countries in question are still using the old names and rejecting the politically inspired new names.  

With Gdańsk, it should be called Gdańsk when its official name was Gdańsk, that is before 1308 and after 1945 and Danzig in the period in-between. I would favor renaming this article Danzig crisis (1932) or maybe the Danzig incident (1932). The latter might be better because when people think of the Danzig crisis they tend to think of the 1939 crisis that led to World War II. Does anyone have any objections if this article were to be moved to the Danzig incident (1932)? Also, when people think of the term Gdańsk crisis, they usually think of the uprising of 1970 or the Solidarność movement of 1980-81. Before anybody complains that this article is not linked to any other article, I would like to the name sorted out first. Best wishes and cheers everybody! --A.S. Brown (talk) 05:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Simple answer Gdanzig crisis :) More serious: WP:NCGN was created to answer this very question. I think Gdanzig vote conclusion is that this should be under Danzig crisis (1932) unless there is a clear consensus in English literature for the usage of Gdansk in this context (which would invoke WP:COMMONNAME). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Piotrus! I rather thought the Danzig crisis (1932) would be the best term. This is rather stupid question on my part, but it is better to be honest about one's ignorance than pretend to mastery of something that one doesn't possess; how do we get the article moved? My understanding is that cut-and-paste jobs are disapproved of because it hides the edit history of the article, so I won't do that, but at present I'm not aware of how to move the article:(:(. Thanks for your help and feedback, much appreciated! --A.S. Brown (talk) 04:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Don't worry about that. This technologically inept editor has finally figured out that. Thanks again for all your help and advice!--A.S. Brown (talk) 23:32, 23 April 2020 (UTC)