 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Requested move
editPlease participate in centralised discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias --Espoo (talk) 14:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was not moved per lack of consensus and in favor of currently ongoing centralized discussion instead. Non-admin closure (Help clear the backlog). Cybercobra (talk) 06:23, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Garður → Gardur — 1) Spelling used in English by the town itself. The town's website uses Garður in English a few times, apparently by mistake since it mostly uses Gardur. 2) Garður incomprehensible to almost all Wikipedia users. 3) The article should mention Garður once in the lede: "Gardur or Garður (original spelling) is a settlement in the municipality of ..." 4) (This is a completely different problem from accents or umlauts, which do not need to be ignored or changed to oe etc. because they do not make the words incomprehensible i.e. unreadable to WP users.) --Espoo (talk) 23:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whether or not ð should be used in article titles is a general issue which we should discuss in some centralized location rather than piecemeal across a selection of obscure article talk pages, the way Espoo has set things up now. This is no way to get broad input on the question.
- On the specific case of Garður it is not hard to find recent English sources which use the ð. Here's one:[1] But I'd really prefer not to delve deeply into this particular case and instead proceed to a centralized discussion at some place of Espoo's choosing. See Talk:Gießen for more of this conversation. Haukur (talk) 00:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- Support per town's own English usage, that the requested title is in ASCII, and the fact that monoglot anglophones, and non-European polyglot anglophones will not recognize the "O" as not an "o". 76.66.197.2 (talk) 06:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - no reason to follow the usage of one website. To follow just one source entirely misses the point of WP:NAME, where we look at the usage of reliable English-language sources taken as a whole. WP:OFFICIALNAMES, although not policy, is a pretty accurate picture of Wikipedia's use of "official" names - we consider them, but do not automatically prefer them. The rest of the rationale about how readers pronounce the name to themselves is pure irrelevant speculation. There's precious few English people who can correctly pronounce Hódmezővásárhely or Chkhorotsqu either - picking out ß or þ for extinction does precious little for anybody in that regard. It's not worth losing the consistency of naming when redirects from the alternatives exist, and making the change helps no-one. This is a non-starter. Knepflerle (talk) 12:37, 15 November 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.