Talk:Telecommunications in the Falkland Islands

Penetration

My apologies if appropriate, for removing the last edit. Anything which says that 'penetration is over 100%' is suspect. If the rest of the information is valid, please re-add in an appropriate way. DJ Clayworth 18:44, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Penetration is over 100%, I'll check the exact figures and put them there, but every house has at least one line, many have more, and of course business can have many lines. Therefore penetration is well over 100%. --Tweed 01:38, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Malvinas?

Back on 5 and 6 January 2014 I made a round of three updates to this article. Before I started my edits the article was tagged as "may require rewriting and/or reformatting". The article had the single line:

Telecommunications in the Falkland Islands

rather than a proper lead. I changed this to read:

Telecommunications in the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) includes radio, television, fixed and mobile telephones, and the Internet.

On 28 January User:Andhanq deleted the name "(Malvinas)" with an edit summary that said "Article is in English, no need for that name here". I reverted that change with an edit summary that said "rv, from the Falkland Islands article: "The United Nations ... official designation for the territory is 'Falkland Islands (Malvinas)' ". On 30 January User:Andhanq reverted my revert and removed "(Malvinas)" again with an edit summary of "This compromise name is not used locally. It is as absurd as "FYROM". It is mentioned in the main article, that is enough".

I originally added "(Malvinas)" to the lead because I felt that if that was part of the official name used by the UN, that it should be included and because it might be helpful to people who had heard or read the two names, letting them know that they are in fact two names for the same place, rather than two different places, and they had in fact found the correct article. The CIA World Factbook, where a bunch of this article's facts come from, uses a heading that reads "Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas)". The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) uses "Falkland Islands (Malvinas)" or less often for documents in Spanish "Malvinas (Islas) (Falkland)". On Wikipedia there is a #REDIRECT page from Malvinas to the main Falkland Islands page.

So, including "(Malvinas)" in the lead for this article certainly does no harm and it may be helpful to some people. I'd like to add it back. What do others think? --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 14:43, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Well. Good to have a discussion, rather than just change it back and forth. In my opinon people reading en-wp are most familiar with the name Falkland Islands. So there is no need to "explain" it by putting (Malvinas) in brackets. The double name including "Malvinas" is some form of compromise made to please the Argentines. It is the same with the strange "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" (trying to make the Greeks happy). Perhaps theese forms must be used in some UN-related circumstances not to obset Argentina or Greece respectively. On Wikipedia such names can be explained in the articles about the respective country. Due to the bahaviour of their neighbour the "Malvinas"-name is offesive to Falkland Islanders. --Andhanq (talk) 16:44, 30 January 2014 (UTC).

See WP:NCGN#Falkland Islands for the standing Wikipedia consensus on this. This article is not a geographical article and does not directly deal with the dispute, so "Malvinas" does not belong.

I'd note that the UN is not a politically neutral body, and like many international organisations has to dance diplomatic circles around the two parties to the dispute. Malvinas sees no significant usage as an English word, except in sources directly influenced by the Argentine government, so the likelihood of confusion is small. Kahastok talk 17:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)