- And of Vlachernae as well, I'm fairly sure yes. '-Issa' (and '-itissa') are generally suffixes to denote the feminine - like Geronta is Elder and Gerontissa is Eldress.
- But - is Vlachernitissa the best term? Admittedly, I haven't seen a lot of reference in English, but I recall the founding of a monastery in America with the patronal of 'Panagia Vlachernae' - people wanting to know the history would probably go to that rather than this one. It's not enough for me to campaign or anything, but if it should change it should be earlier rather than later. — edited by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 09:51, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- PS, I WAS stupid enough not to link to the article correctly ...as Homer Simpson would say, DOH! -- Vasiliki 13:44, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- Vasiliki, in my defense, I have a fairly large track record of checking up a lot of articles, particularly those that I think others may not be likely to (which excludes mostly articles on or about North American things, where there are plenty of sysops and editors). Also, remember that for a lot of people on OW, Greek is, well, Greek to them (and, to a large extent, myself) - hence the clarification on what variations can abound and what they mean...that's what Talk pages are about. — edited by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 15:25, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- Ela Pistevo ... I am so stupid I also forgot to put a smiley at the end of my paragraph ...no need to have a defence as I wasnt persecuting you with my paragraph ...I was being cheeky ...my point being, that I created Blachernitissa off the DEC page ... Please have a look at the page. It lists standardised 'names'. I dont know why you guys are so 'particular' with the names ... there are many articles that you guys have created over the last few years that clearly adopt 'greeklish' yet I feel its only my articles that keep getting 'discussed'. PS. I definately have respect for the fact that you, Magda, Wsk, Andrew, Fr Andrew and various others have been on this for many years ... A smile before I log off and get back to my work. :-) -- Vasiliki 15:37, February 14, 2008 (PST)
So if "Blachernitissa" and "Vlacharnea" refer to the same thing, then am I correct that the Vlacharnea article needs to be merged here? Vasiliki, your articles get discussed so much, I think, because we are excited about getting so much new and interesting material. We are trying to make things easier for you by showing you how to hone your editing skills at the same time as improving the articles and the wiki as a whole. —magda (talk) 16:27, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- Oh, I see what you were asking now ..there were two articles! I completely forgot I started off as Vlacharnea ... Gees. I know what happened. DCAndrew referred me off to the DEC page ... then I must have noticed that the standardised naming convention their was Blachernitissa and then started the article again ...forgetting I had the other one (I must slow down the number of tasks I do ...I know I am on speed but I hate making these mistakes). So, the question now is ...which one to merge in to? Personally I like the Panagia Blachernae article to remain because the extension more closely resembles the actual name of the suburb of Blachernai in Constantinople ... but on the other hand the DEC page has her as Blachernitissa. I will update this link with the other articles information ..and then I suppose you guys can resolve which to keep. -- Vasiliki 16:36, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- The usual standpoint for OW articles is to use the most recognised name - but the name of this icon (or most others), well, doesn't have a recognised name because there is a low level of recognition (which these articles are addressing).
- Probably part of the reason that I keep saying 'is this the right name?' is because, well, we haven't really had this problem before. Precedents could be Matins/Orthros (which I was involved in discussing) or the names for the vestments, but there's really no straightforward precedent (Matins/Orthros, everyone knows what it is, it's a question of which is the more widely accepted; the English names for vestments only happen in one service book, and one can assume some level of N.T. Greek education amongst those who have to wear it...icons, however, have had a more church-wide devotion)...
- Which leads into the reason that your articles are being discussed - we've already had big or small discussions over the other names (or groups thereof)!
- As to what style should be used (Blachernae or Blachernitissa), I would personally lean more towards using a V at the beginning (i.e. how beta is pronounced in modern Greek), but...well, you're doing the article, which is more common, or which could gain wider recognition? — edited by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 17:13, February 14, 2008 (PST)
Good-heavens ... how to reply? It is true I am adding these articles but that is irrelevant because I am bound to OW Style boundaries. The only reason I would not comply is out of ignorance (newby-ness). What I AM familiar with, however, is Orthodoxy ... I have been in it for 32 years now and have experienced it in such varied ways especially through the experience of travel ... so i find it amusing that the majority of the most interesting Orthodox historical information is infact some of the least recognised information by the new American/Australian anglophonic Orthodox. This statement is not for offense ... its just that ... if someone is new to Orthodoxy (My definition of being 'new' doesnt mean that you are any less 'theologised' or 'Spiritual' but it does mean lack of experience -only) then OF COURSE they have NEVER heard of this stuff before! That is what I believe SHOULD make the OrthodoxWiki portal ... education not just of the known but the unknown ... we cant just adopt the thinking of most 'anglophonic' based Orthodox havent heard of it 'SO!' lets keep it to what they know because then we would limit their growth ... I am of the opinion (not forcing this down anyone throat) that we should present NEW information to 'fulfill' their experience of the Orthodox Tradition ... Eg. such as listing these endless beautiful OLD icons of the Theotokos! Much of the historical growth and understanding of being Orthodox comes through the knowledge of each intimate part of the Orthodox world - even if it appears repetitive (like many, many icons of the one Theotokos)!
Wow ... what a GASS bag I am ... at the end of the day, I dont care if it is a 'B' or a 'V' or if it is an 'itissa' or a 'arnea' as long as the essence of the information appears closely to the truth of what it is ... any variations are superficial unless the affect the information of the icon (many icons have a close link to the name for a reason). You guys decide what is better ... I will modify a lot of the existing articles (I need to clean up what I have) but in the future if I create something that is not quite right ..change it by all means!! :-) -- Vasiliki 17:38, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- Well, I'm going to go ahead and make the other article a redirect to this one. If a consensus of "best name" is reached after that, we can always change it. In the meantime, it might be useful to include alternate spellings so that people who know it by only one name can still find this article. —magda (talk) 19:02, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- That sounds like a good idea. I will do a bit more research into this because it just occured to me during lunch that there are two locations with the same 'name' - the first is Constantinople and the second is in Greece. Both of these places have an icon bearing 'smilar' name ...so it is worthwhile finding out if they are considered the 'same' icon (ie. The one in Greece is a copy of that in Constantinople) or if each has been named after its respective location (this is certain for the one in Constantinople and it would appear is the case for the one in Vlacherna, Greece - since they have a Church named after this location). However, I am not sure for certain and can only assume at this stage ...that similar icon with same name until proved otherwise!! I love it ... I feel like Inspector Gadget! -- Vasiliki 19:08, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- You are, of course, quite right - information should not be limited to that which neophytes know. The point is more that we don't have an official OW style as to how to refer to these icons, i.e. how information is presented (rather than what information) - this is good information, and it's definitely one of the 'competitive advantages' that OW has; the only reason that I ponder which word is better is because of a desire to make sure that people who are interested can be connected with their interest. It probably doesn't look it, but my motivations are to support! — edited by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 19:21, February 14, 2008 (PST)
- Oh no, dont go thinking I cant see how devoted you are to Orthodoxy. I dont believe that you would take so much care and effort and time to this if you didnt ... my concern is this, if someone (neophytes) dont know about something or what they are looking for would a name difference make all that much of a difference? Its not that necessary, I think at least, to completely put rules around (limiting this conversation to the icons of the Theotokos only) the names because then it might become too restrictive ... in anything with life, I think, when we become too restrictive we become less creative and lose the enthusiasm ... What do you think? BTW, should this entire discussion be cut and pasted under my Ixthis888 account under a "panagia Blachernitissa" category? Im just conscious of how lengthy this discussion is! .. and its a good discussion too! -- Vasiliki