Talk:Utqiagvik, Alaska

Common name does use dotted-g < ġ >

In fact the official name as recognized by the USGS Board of Geographic Names does in fact use the dotted-g < ġ > (rendered with Unicode U+CC87, combining dot above).

https://geonames.usgs.gov/apex/f?p=138:3:0::NO:3:P3_FID,P3_TITLE:1398635,Utqiag%CC%87vik

The fact that some sites do not use this special character should not be taken as evidence that the English spelling of the name lacks the dotted-g. Shouldn't the article title reflect the official English name rather than an alternate spelling? Gholton (talk) 16:04, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 2 August 2020

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) Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 06:31, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

---

Utqiagvik, Alaska → Utqiaġvik – Utqiagvik is a misspelling, and is only used in certain publications due to a lack of the character 'ġ,' legally and officially, the city's name in English and in Iñupiatun is Utqiaġvik WZibell (talk) 01:03, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

• Comment – per MOS:USPLACE, you might want to add a ", Alaska" to the proposed title. Paintspot Infez (talk) 02:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

  Yes although I don't particularly agree with this, this is the guideline since it appears Americans usually treat the state as being part of the name, therefore Utqiaġvik, Alaska. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

• Comment: It's hard to say whether the common name includes the dotted g, as the sources not including it might just not know how to type it. O.N.R. ^(talk) 09:01, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:USEENGLISH. I'm very wary of proclamations that the common English name of anything would include a letter that no English keyboard is able to type and most English speakers don't know how to pronounce. I'd need to see some concrete evidence that the common English spelling uses the dotted G letter. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose WP:DIACRITICS says that we should follow the most common form in English-language reliable sources when deciding whether to use diacritics, so I would expect a request like this to include evidence that English sources usually use diacritics. However even the the city council doesn't use diacritics outside the logo. Hut 8.5 12:13, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
• Comment It's not completely out of this world to use native diacritics within countries that don't use the same characters in their respective primary languages. Haleakalā, a shield volcano in the U.S. state of Hawaii, is spelled with native diacritics. However, Lanai, Hawaii's sixth largest island, is supposed to be spelled "Lāna'i", but its Wikipedia title is nevertheless spelled "Lanai". My conclusion is that, in the end, there is no wrong answer. --HyettsTheGamer2 (talk) 01:40, 7 August 2020 (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.

Requested move 13 December 2022

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. WP:SNOW; it is clear that WP:USPLACE has to be deprecated for this to have any chance of succeeding. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

---

Utqiagvik, Alaska → Utqiagvik – There isn't another "Utqiagvik" that is as notable as this one, if not exists another one. "Utqiagvik" itself should be ambiguous enough for now. Any objections? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 19:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose STRONGLY per WP:USPLACE. You might want to take a look at that guideline — EVERY single U.S. city's page's article titles is to have the format "[CityName], [StateName]" —  except a FEW, VERY-SPECIFIC exceptions (each being INCREDIBLY major cities) listed by the Associated Press's style guide. Of coruse we can keep the redirect, but this page must remain with the state name. (Plus, if this page is moved, it'd open up a humongous can of worms that would break an established long-standing format. If it ain't broke, don't fix break it.) Paintspot Infez (talk) 21:22, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Should not be moved unless the long-standing WP:USPLACE is changed. 162 etc. (talk) 21:28, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
• As mentioned this is American common usage even though I personally don't support unnecessarily disambiguating pages due to the complications this can cause. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:29, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Most reliable sources in the US, from national media to many American references commonly append the state to placenames. The whole point of the WP:USPLACE guideline is to provide a consistent naming convention that primarily matches these reliable sources in the US. Only a selected few major cities are commonly referred to without appending the state name, hence the so-called "Associated Press's style guide" exception rule, but Utqiagvik is not one of those cities. For example, this Business Insider article first refers to it as "Utqiagvik, Alaska" in its headline, subheadline, and the first instance in the body text. For further explanation, see Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Remove state from US placenames. Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose this is standard practice for names of US places per WP:USPLACE. Hut 8.5 17:39, 14 December 2022 (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.

New photo of the whalebone arch

I recently had a chance to get up to Utqiagvik with a good camera and got a picture of the whalebone arch which I thought may be useful as one of the pictures on this article. I don't fully know the history of the discussions around this and don't exactly want to slap my own photo in a prominent place without outside input, but figured this may be a bit different than some of what was already here, particularly considering it's prominence in most media around Utqiagvik and the lack of any photo here.

Whalebone arch in Utqiagvik Alaska

Warrenmck (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't see why not, the article does talk quite a bit about whaling in the area. Hut 8.5 11:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Pronunciation inconsistent with source

The pronunciation given by the page contains no 'g' sound: /ˌʊtkiˈɑːvɪk/ UUT-kee-AH-vik. But the pronunciation given by the source does contain a 'g' sound: https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/rural-alaska/2016/10/29/barrows-new-name-is-its-old-one-utqiagvik-local-inupiaq-leaders-hope-its-use-heals-as-it-teaches/

I'm not sure how to correct the pronunciation. In the meantime, should it be removed so that it doesn't mislead readers? 2603:7080:A507:A8E1:CCE3:3CE2:60FD:2784 (talk) 14:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC)