Talk:Electoral district of Logan
(Redirected from Talk:Logan (Queensland electoral district))
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Jenks24 in topic Move?
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Move?
edit- 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: no consensus, restore status quo ante, which is Electoral district of Logan. Jenks24 (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Logan (Queensland electoral district) → Electoral district of Logan – I moved this page to here from Electoral district of Logan, obeying a user request to disambiguate it from the similar Logan (electoral district) in Manitoba in Canada. I then received the following message in my user talk page: Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:16, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hi there. Would you mind reversing your recent move here? This isn't your fault, but it was never appropriate for RM as uncontroversial, as the move has moved it away from the naming standard for hundreds of Australian electorates. Given that the format is different for the Canadian and Australian terms I would think a hatnote would suffice, but if the proposer (and I haven't been able to find it in the history but that's probably because I don't know my way around RM) wants to suggest it they can go ahead through a proper move discussion. Frickeg (talk) 08:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- The format is purely disambiguational, in Canadian English, the former article name for the Australian district is used to refer to the Canadian district. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 04:34, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hi there. Would you mind reversing your recent move here? This isn't your fault, but it was never appropriate for RM as uncontroversial, as the move has moved it away from the naming standard for hundreds of Australian electorates. Given that the format is different for the Canadian and Australian terms I would think a hatnote would suffice, but if the proposer (and I haven't been able to find it in the history but that's probably because I don't know my way around RM) wants to suggest it they can go ahead through a proper move discussion. Frickeg (talk) 08:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- As an additional note: I still think that disambiguation is probably unnecessary in this case given the different naming formats, but if it were to go ahead, Electoral district of Logan (Queensland) would be the appropriate place. Frickeg (talk) 09:27, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- support for move to Electoral district of Logan (Queensland) as this fits our normal naming pattern including our normal way to disambiguate. Kerry (talk) 22:00, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- Electoral district of Logan (Queensland) works for me. The old format "electoral district of Logan" does not work, as it is also used in Canadian English to refer to the Canadian district. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 04:34, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
- But Canada uses a different format altogether, Logan (electoral district). To disambiguate further seems to me unnecessary - why can't we just have a hatnote at the top of each one? As I recall (although not very strongly, so correct me if I'm wrong), part of the reason all the countries went with different formats when we started these articles was to avoid having to disambiguate in this way. It's in much the same way that we in Australia have differentiated between, say, Division of Sydney and Electoral district of Sydney without having to include (state) and (federal) in there somewhere. A hatnote on both pages provides all the information we need and performs the same function as a disambiguation page anyway. Frickeg (talk) 13:41, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
- You're confusing Wikipedia based disambiguation with usage based in the real world. These are two different things. In Canada, people do not write down parenthetical disambiguation, they would write down "electoral district of Logan". Wikipedia's defined disambiguation is not a real world usage. In Canadian English, we use the phrasing "electoral district of X" to refer to electoral districts of "X". If we need to distinguish between the provincial and federal electoral districts, then we say "federal electoral district of X" and "provincial electoral district of X" (or "province-name electoral district of X") There is no separate name in Canada for federal, provincial or local electoral districts, they are just "electoral districts". -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:34, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
- If that is the case, why are Canadian electorates not at "Electoral district of X" as well, then? Frickeg (talk) 07:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
- It's formal language, informally, electoral districts in provinces and federally are called "ridings". Personally, I'd prefer all Canadian provincial and federal electoral districts to use "riding" as the disambiguator instead of "electoral district", since informally, that's how they're referred to. WP:CANADA already shot down that idea of using "riding" -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:13, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, OK. I still think it's sufficient just to use hatnotes (that way at least half of the people searching are going to end up at the right place, since there's just the two), but I'm not going to die in a ditch over it. As long as it's the "electoral district of X" format, which I think we're all agreed on. Frickeg (talk) 08:03, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
- It's formal language, informally, electoral districts in provinces and federally are called "ridings". Personally, I'd prefer all Canadian provincial and federal electoral districts to use "riding" as the disambiguator instead of "electoral district", since informally, that's how they're referred to. WP:CANADA already shot down that idea of using "riding" -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:13, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
- If that is the case, why are Canadian electorates not at "Electoral district of X" as well, then? Frickeg (talk) 07:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
- You're confusing Wikipedia based disambiguation with usage based in the real world. These are two different things. In Canada, people do not write down parenthetical disambiguation, they would write down "electoral district of Logan". Wikipedia's defined disambiguation is not a real world usage. In Canadian English, we use the phrasing "electoral district of X" to refer to electoral districts of "X". If we need to distinguish between the provincial and federal electoral districts, then we say "federal electoral district of X" and "provincial electoral district of X" (or "province-name electoral district of X") There is no separate name in Canada for federal, provincial or local electoral districts, they are just "electoral districts". -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:34, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
- But Canada uses a different format altogether, Logan (electoral district). To disambiguate further seems to me unnecessary - why can't we just have a hatnote at the top of each one? As I recall (although not very strongly, so correct me if I'm wrong), part of the reason all the countries went with different formats when we started these articles was to avoid having to disambiguate in this way. It's in much the same way that we in Australia have differentiated between, say, Division of Sydney and Electoral district of Sydney without having to include (state) and (federal) in there somewhere. A hatnote on both pages provides all the information we need and performs the same function as a disambiguation page anyway. Frickeg (talk) 13:41, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support moving this to either of the alternatives that are not the current name. The Drover's Wife (talk) 15:00, 30 August 2014 (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.