Talk:San-Pédro, Ivory Coast

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• San Pédro Logo.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ville de San Pédro collage.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:24, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• San Pédro Montage.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 11 November 2023

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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 00:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

---

San-Pédro, Ivory Coast → San-Pédro – I felt ever since signing on to WP that some editors would want to have me on the wrong side of the policies so as to get me blocked/banned and 162 etc. is proven to be one of them. Having gone quiet and not opposed to my title change request listed at WP:RMTR that went through and its associated category got moved unopposed, they all of a sudden popped up and subsequently listed a counter-move/move reversion for the purposes of "undiscussed" and ambiguity in this clearly unambiguous title, which is truly beyond me. It seems clearly that they were unaware about the movements pagewise and only heeded to what was on the San Pedro DAB page (which didn't reflect the title change at the time) until I intervened. Intrisit (talk) 11:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 17:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. This city's name is often seen in secondary sources without the hyphen or accent, and San-Pédro is insufficiently disambiguated. 162 etc. (talk) 16:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
• Comment. I am in no way suggesting that User:Intrisit should be blocked or banned. WP:AGF. 162 etc. (talk) 16:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

If you know or have seen this, why couldn't you contest my request there and there so that page movers like BarrelProof will not wade into this in any way. Or better still, list it at uncontroversial with the original title that was moved in the first place and not a move reversion because it is "undiscussed". Intrisit (talk) 13:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Your request at WP:RM/TR was handled and removed within 15 minutes, it's clearly unreasonable to expect all possible objectors to come forward in that short time. Anyone opposed can ask for the move to be reverted at the same venue, even a few days later, so I see no wrongdoing by 162 etc here. Instead of complaining about other editors you should provide a rationale for why you believe that disambiguation is not required in this case. BegbertBiggs (talk) 15:56, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@BegbertBiggs: It seems very clear you want me blocked and also that I'm repeating myself, as part of it is below BarrelProof's comment. Well, here is the rationale: I said that the components of the "San-Pédro" title here as against the "San Pedro" DAB title makes no sense of title ambiguity, which 162 etc. provided and also mentioned that the title had no hyphenation or accented "e", which was what I saw at the DAB page, but disagreed anyway. I see no wrongdoing in 162 etc.'s request either, which by the way happened from nowhere, but rather its strangeness given that the title saw no updates until I intervened and this happened. Intrisit (talk) 20:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

• Comment. The nominator has not really provided a focused rationale. They mostly commented about what they think other people think and know or don't know and what happened on Wikipedia. Please describe why you think the article should be renamed. Does this have something to do with the hyphen? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:33, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@BarrelProof: The focused rationale lies with 162 etc., not me. I just opened an RM so as not to engage in edit/move warring. Why they didn't contest my request when I listed it first time knowing very well that the title was moved three times uncontested and unopposed is beyond me. My first move request as you will see from the page history was moved to a title I felt was unnecessarily disambiguated, and yes, the components of the "San-Pédro" title, unlike the "San Pedro" DAB title.Intrisit (talk) 13:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

So the idea seems to be that this relatively small city is a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "San-Pédro". I'm skeptical, but that hyphenated and accented name has redirected to this topic for a long time. In contrast, San-Pedro redirects to the dab page at San Pedro, and has for a long time. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

PRIMARYTOPIC?! Definitely not! But exactly my point and my rationale for requesting the RMTR on this title in the first place, because of the "Ivory Coast" DABber and not "San-Pédro", which was exactly what I saw from the page move history. Our grudge (yours included) with this page is the serious lack of sourcing which would have prevented this or any other RM from ever appearing for this title. Intrisit (talk) 04:00, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I am having trouble understanding your comments. If you are suggesting that this topic is not a proper PRIMARYTOPIC for "San-Pédro", then you seem to be arguing against your own proposal. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 11:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

No, it's the exact opposite, besides I'm rather referring to "San Pedro" DAB title. "San-Pédro" should have no DAB is what I'm having you to understand, as "San Pédro" already redirects to the DAB page. Intrisit (talk) 03:51, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. Far too ambiguous. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:46, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

  How ambiguous?! Outside the hyphenation and accented "e", this page would have no RM by now! Have you checked the move/pagemove history of this page? If so, you'll be having a different response, but if not, no wonder! Intrisit (talk) 03:53, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

  Yes I have. Your comment makes no sense. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:45, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting on request on talk page. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 17:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Per Amakuru's request to make the point without...accusing other editors of things, I ask: what is this city's common name? Excluding mirrors of Wikipedia, DuckDuckGo gives me one source for "San Pédro", several for "San Pedro" [1][2][3][4]. Open to being wrong, I'm wondering what is everybody else is seeing. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:55, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi User:Rotideypoc41352, I'll hopefully be back with a more thorough comment tomorrow, but my sense is we have a choice between two titles - either plain San-Pédro (which satisfies WP:NATURALDIS and is clearly I think a WP:SMALLDETAILS primary topic over other San Pedro topics) or else, if we think the hyphen and diacritic form is actually unusual and rare, them to move to San Pedro, Ivory Coast. I think the status quo, having the unique characters but also disambiguating with the Ivory Coast addition (even though San-Pédro actually redirects here anyway) is the least good solution to this. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 22:27, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

No objection to San Pedro, Ivory Coast. 162 etc. (talk) 23:43, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Relisting comment: I haven't seen any consensus by now. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per 162 etc. and Necrothesp as well as comments by BarrelProof. Main title headers of English Wikipedia articles should not differ from each other solely via accents, diacritics or punctuation. The San Pedro disambiguation page lists 71 bulleted entries, including two dab pages — San Pedro, Oaxaca and San Pedro, Spain — with numerous additional entries. Furthermore, as of this writing, San-Pedro redirects to the San Pedro dab page, while San-Pédro and San Pédro redirect to San-Pédro, Ivory Coast. It would thus seem that, regardless of WP:SMALLDETAILS and whether there are any other entries bearing hyphens and/or accents, in order to avoid confusion, all redirects using any form of standalone "San Pedro" should flow to the San Pedro dab page. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 06:38, 4 December 2023 (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.

Title change scenario

On 11 November 2023, I created and got involved in this RM about a disambiguation of article title stylizations whose conclusion wasn't to my satisfaction but was justified per consensus, which is why I'm not opting for a move review. I'm using {{admin help}} instead of {{help me}} to get thoughts of you, the most experienced of Wikipedians, about which path I should take to resolve this issue, as I feel the use of "help me" won't be that quick and immediate. Should I use an RFC, the Village pump, the Article titles' talk page or the RMTR, since I could use the latter to revert to a previous article title. Thanks! Intrisit (talk) 08:49, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not sure what the issue is. It doesn't look like anything went wrong? Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 16:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper: For the closed RM, nothing truly wrong with it and I accept its conclusion, but with regret. The regret being that, I could have avoided creating an RM for it in the first place. For clarity, I requested for the elimination of the disambiguator in the title at RMTR as I saw that it was titled differently from the other entries at its related DAB page and Polyamorph granted and executed it. I saw 162 etc.'s reversal request on the assertion of Likely ambiguous also at RMTR and did nothing — that is the regret and the issue as a whole! Forseeing that it may be contested and I may be recommended to initiate an RM for it when I thought of making a second request for a title change is why I initiated that RM straightaway. It was out of fear for a user block for harassment and NPA. Intrisit (talk) 06:00, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

No, you couldn't have. RMTR is for uncontroversial moves; you'll see in the instructions that if your RMTR gets contested, you're directed to start a true RM on the talk page. The fact that you did that, and that it didn't succeed, means that RMTR would have been, and still is, inappropriate. 162's request to revert a recent move was reasonable. You should accept that consensus is against you in this matter and drop it. Also, I have no idea where "fear for a block for harassment and NPA" comes from...were you planning on harassing and personally attacking someone if you didn't get your way? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:20, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper: No! Else, my last admin request would have been my last set of contributions here! By that last line, I'm afraid that could happen. But, upon the study the actions of already-blocked users here, I'm self-checked on NPA and harassment. It's not just on the RM, it's about the relationship between titles and DABs. Nevertheless, the title in question may have another RM this year, as it is connected to the 2023 Africa Cup of Nations with respect to a stadium located there and sources may appear for proof of which is the correct title. My requests are answered. So, now waiting for the developments... Intrisit (talk) 21:26, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Are you asking how to get your way despite the consensus decision? I say drop it. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:56, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

@UtherSRG: In terms of getting it my way or getting my way through with regards to an already-closed RM, I doubt to the highest degree as I'm already registered in and editing a collaborative encyclopaedia like this one, so no! My point with my request to you and other admins is, I wanted an appropriate conversation tool or method I could use to advance a conversation stemming from that RM about specific article title DABs, because it's like any title at all can or could be DAB material just like that. That is what I'm asking from you Admins and not just any Wikipedian. The long and short of it is, looking at its related DAB page, I could have requested an RMTR back to the original title given in that RM or contested 162 etc.'s reversal RMTR request that it is "Likely ambiguous." when in reality it isn't the case. I fear using the wrong method for this and get myself blocked! Intrisit (talk) 06:00, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Then I think you are still looking in the wrong place. Admins are janitors; we implement policy that is decided on by the community. If you want a discussion that will change a policy or even just change a standard, you will need to open a discussion with the whole community, via a WP:RFC. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:16, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh, my conscience has always been with the notion that Admins are "the most experienced of experienced Wikipedians here" despite the ranking among the WP/WM administration chain and what they really do. On that title though, nonetheless, I'm watching with interest because it is currently connected to the 2023 Africa Cup of Nations, as sourcing might/may pop up from online about a stadium located there. This RM may have concluded but I may start another when the sources arrive. Thanks, admin! Intrisit (talk) 21:26, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

What issue is there to "resolve"? You have said yourself that the conclusion was "justified per consensus", so it is resolved. That's the end of it. JBW (talk) 22:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

@JBW: For the RM, truly, that's the end of it, it's resolved and I accept its conclusion. The issue here in question is with my inaction or non-reaction (even if it goes through and executed) to contest 162 etc.'s reversal request at RMTR. But I may still be able to advance a conversation with regards to article title disambiguations and that is where I will say it's unresolved, because the more I look at the subject title for my RM at its related DAB page relative to/among the other entries there, I feel disappointed. Maybe, I could bring the users involved in my RM; 162 etc., Necrothesp and Roman Spinner here instead of initiating an RFC on the title's talk page, as to why despite the title's independent stylization relative to the other DAB entries, it's still classified as ambiguous and/or incomplete DAB. Intrisit (talk) 06:00, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

Hi, 162 etc., Necrothesp, Roman Spinner ! I'm starting an RFC on this talk page on the RM which I created/invoked! See you there! Intrisit (talk) 08:49, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

"San Pédro, Côte d'Ivoire" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect San Pédro, Côte d'Ivoire has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 6 § San Pédro, Côte d'Ivoire until a consensus is reached. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)