Talk:Borup, Køge Municipality

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:13, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

---

---

• Borup, Køge Municipality → Borup (Køge Municipality)
• Ejby, Køge Municipality → Ejby (Køge Municipality)
• Ejby, Lejre Municipality → Ejby (Lejre Municipality)
• Ejby, Middelfart Municipality → Ejby (Middelfart Municipality)
• Svenstrup, Aalborg Municipality → Svenstrup (Aalborg Municipality)

– Improper disambiguation. Cities and towns in Denmark are not generally following the US "City, State" pattern. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose: Per naming conventions (it would help if the proposer read them). Standard pattern for geographic places is to disambiguate by comma worldwide (not just North America). Has absolutely nothing to do with North American "City, State" pattern. Skinsmoke (talk) 02:27, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
• Comment: The exact current wordings on WP:NCGN#Disambiguation on the comma convention is that "Any specific national convention takes precedence though". However, it also says in the last paragraph of that section that "If specific disambiguation conventions apply to places of a particular type or in a particular country, then it is important to follow these". I do not see a country-specific guideline for article titles on Danish settlements, but WP:NCGN#Disambiguation also says, "If a country has no convention listed, and there is a clear pattern among the articles on places in that country, follow it". Unfortunately, when I took a quick glance at the subcategories of Category:Cities and towns in Denmark by region it was inconsistent. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
• Comment: The North American "City, State" naming convention is used whether the place name is ambiguous or not (except for some 20 big cities). Thus, whether the State tag is a disambiguator is debatable. You might as well say that it (in most cases) eliminates the need for a disambiguator. So, the cases are not directly comparable. Moreover, if "Xxxxx, Yyyyyy Municipality" were the naming convention for Danish cities, then all of them would be named that way, regardless of whether they are ambiguous with cities in other countries or not, wouldn't they? HandsomeFella (talk) 10:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
• Comment (transcluded from similar discussion at Talk:Hatting, Denmark#Requested move) (why are two identical discussions going on in different places?): A lot of very selective quoting from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) going on here. What that page actually says is:

With the names of cities, towns, villages and other settlements, as well as administrative divisions, the tag is normally preceded by a comma, as in Hel, Poland, and Polk County, Tennessee. Any specific national convention takes precedence though.

With natural features, the tag normally appears in parentheses, as in Eagle River (Colorado). Specific pre-existing national conventions may take precedence though.

Generic parenthetical disambiguating tags as used for most Wikipedia articles are used only occasionally for geographic names (as in Wolin (town), where no regional tag would be sufficient to distinguish the town from the island of Wolin).

That is a guideline. It is backed up by the policy at Wikipedia:Article titles, which states:

# Parenthetical disambiguation: If natural disambiguation is not possible, add a disambiguating term in parentheses, after the ambiguous name.

Example: The word "mercury" has distinct meanings that do not have sufficiently common alternative names, so we use instead parenthetical disambiguation: Mercury (element), Mercury (mythology), and Mercury (planet).

Comma-separated disambiguation. With place names, if the disambiguating term is a higher-level administrative division, it is often separated using a comma instead of parentheses, as in Windsor, Berkshire (see Geographic names). Comma-separated disambiguation is sometimes also used in other contexts (e.g., Diana, Princess of Wales; see Names of royals and nobles). However, titles such as Tony Blair and Battle of Waterloo are preferred over alternatives such as "Blair, Anthony Charles Lynton" and "Waterloo, Battle of", in which a comma is used to change the natural ordering of the words.

In these cases, there is no national convention that advises parenthetical disambiguation, so we stick with the usual convention, which is to use commas. It really is a bit naughty to try and change that convention by drip-feeding a handful of places. If you want to change it, propose a change at Wikipedia talk:Article titles. However, if you succeed, I expect those advocating change to spend the next two years changing the hundreds of thousands of articles that will be affected.

Incidentally, it is disingenuous to argue here that these articles should not follow the "North American pattern of disambiguating by comma", when those same people were arguing last week on North American articles that those articles should not follow the "European pattern of disambiguating by comma" Did you really think nobody would remember? Skinsmoke (talk) 12:36, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• Comments added on Talk:Hatting, Denmark. HandsomeFella (talk) 16:05, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose. My reasons are at Talk:Hatting, Denmark. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.