Talk:Houghton-Douglass Falls

Requested move 9 May 2024

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Moved without consensus, as an uncontested technical request. Any objection within a reasonable time frame should result in the move being reverted and the request being reopened. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 00:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

---

Douglass Houghton Falls → Houghton-Douglass Falls – to match corrected name in article... Jcurtis1114 (talk) 11:20, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Correct naming

This section is started due to the disagreement about the correct name of the falls. I don't have any personal stake in this, but if you're going to change the article name or the name bolded in the lead, you need to make a compelling case with references. . . not just that you always heard it that way. Clearly the name has been used various ways, and there is even an old image of a sign saying "Houghton–Douglass" but the preponderance of usage seems to be "Douglass Houghton". Who the heck is Christopher Columbus Douglass anyhow?? --LilHelpa (talk) 18:42, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Christopher Columbus Douglass is fictional. Also, I highly believe the name of the falls is Douglass Houghton Falls as I know the people who own them. Moonlandingwasahoax (talk) 05:54, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Per WP:PLACE, the titles of place articles ought to reflect the "widely accepted English name," if one exists. I can see an argument that "Douglass Houghton Falls" meets that description, as it's the name I've (anecdotally) heard most often online and in real life. However, proving that would probably require raw search engine data, which WP:WIAN warns "must be considered with extreme caution, if at all." BGN, which the same guidelines suggest is useful, but not a final authority, on conventional names, actually calls it "Houghton Falls," and gives "Douglass Falls," "Houghton-Douglass Falls," and "Douglass Houghton Falls" as alternates. I have seen all of these variations at least a few times in recent news articles and other online sources. (BGN also includes variants with the spelling "Douglas," which I'm inclined to treat as a misspelling and not include anywhere in this article.)

Given that there are multiple names for this place floating around, that all appear to be in at least somewhat common usage, my instinct is to treat this as a case of multiple local names. These guidelines "recommend choosing a single name, by some objective criterion, even a somewhat arbitrary one." I can see this being resolved in three different ways.

First, if someone can prove that the current title does indeed reflect the far-and-away most common contemporary usage in a way that satisfies WP:WIAN and WP:RS, then that title should remain. Second, if a reliable source can be found that establishes "Houghton-Douglass Falls" as the place's original or official English name, that would count as an "objective," if "arbitrary," "criterion." Third, we could instead defer to the authority of BGN and call the article "Houghton Falls." I believe this decision should be left up to consensus, which should take into account evidence (or lack thereof) supporting the first two possibilities I outlined.

The name used by the falls' private owners is not of particular relevance, especially since they sold it to the state of Michigan in 2018. (Although, once this place becomes an officially designated scenic site, the title should probably be changed to match whichever name is used for the site by the state).

The claim that C. C. Douglass was "fictional" seems highly unlikely to me, although his name was Columbus Christopher Douglass, rather than Christopher Columbus Douglass. There are many online references to him, including genealogical records and the site of his grave. Still, a source proving that he is the source of the "Douglass" portion of the name should be located, especially if the title is to be changed to "Houghton-Douglass Falls." Extraordinary evidence would be required to show that he never existed, and in the meantime, I am not inclined to take that claim seriously.

Regardless of what decision is made, all four common names should be at least mentioned in the article. I have just made an edit so that this is the case. Once a consensus is reached, a section in the article describing the controversy around the name might be nice, so that the article helps to clear up the confusion, rather than fueling it further. Aquaticonions (talk) 17:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

How about we refer to the Falls as the State of Michigan refers to it, eh? It's Houghton-Douglass Falls. This has been documented by at least several publications from the state. Most recently it was called Houghton-Douglass Falls in the Michigan House of Representatives Resolution HR #232 of 2024 that was passed by the House. Once the state Senate passes it and the Governor signs off, the site will be called the Houghton-Douglass Falls Veterans Scenic Site. That's what will be on the sign so why not have the wikipedia article have the same information?? Jcurtis1114 (talk) 18:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

His name was Columbus Christopher (C.C.) Douglass. He was Douglass Houghton's cousin on his mother's side. Jcurtis1114 (talk) 18:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)