Talk:Voßstraße/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Street named after Voß

The Voßstraße street was likely named after a person named Voß, see also Voss (surname), several promising candidates listed there.--Matthead 17:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Name

@Adam: First of all great job on all the street articles: however, and I know that seems to be a subject you are very passionate about, I find the name of the article simply awkward.

1) The article itself is inconsistent in its use of variants of the name.

2) It would never be written like this in German, because Straße (or Strasse), as a noun, would be capitalised, so it should at least be Voss-Strasse.

3) By all means, Voßstraße is the German name of the street, so either translate it completely, and call it Voss Street, or stick to the German name. And with all due respect, I don't think that ß is an insult to readers. And, for example, Déjà vu uses the accents, also I would suppose that a large part of readers doesn't know what they are for and how they change pronounciation (although I see the difference between adding an accent and using a different letter). User:Blur4760 12:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on the articles. In reply:

• How it is written in Germany, or how this title looks to Germans, is irrelevant. This is the English Wikipedia and is written for English-readers. Cairo is written لقاهرة in Egypt, but that does not influence how we write it.
• Wikipedia convention seems to be that geographical names such as streets are not translated. Thus we have Unter den Linden not Under the Lime Trees. So I reject Voss Street.
• English does not allow three consonants in a row (for example Inverness-shire). So I reject Vossstrasse.
• But the street name is one word, unlike (say) Leipziger Strasse. In English a capital letter means a seperate word. So I reject Voss Strasse and Voss-Strasse.
• That only leaves Voss-strasse, which is what I have gone with. This is the German name of the street, written according to English usage for English-readers.
• The article was internally inconsistent because others had messed with it. I have now fixed this.
• There is no Wikipedia policy requiring the use of "ß", and so long as that is the case I am entitled to create articles with "ss". I have not sought to move articles created by others which use the "ß", such as Friedrichstraße, and I expect the same courtesy from others.
• An English-reader who had never seen "déjà vu" before would pronounce it approximately correctly, because they would recognise the "e" and the "a" and would ignore the accents. Most English-readers will read Voßstraße as "Vobstrabe".

Adam 13:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm really beginning to lose track of this system you seem to have designed as to what letters and combinations will cause trouble. Is ß bad because it will be confused with B? What about the V, English speakers will probably assume that is a voiced constant, whereas it is unvoiced in German (maybe written Foss in English?). What about the e at the end? Silent or not? And what does it matter that English words are not written with three identical letters in a row, the title is not an English word? What about Szczecin, say, szcz is not an allowed consonant combination in English, is that therefore a bad title? Stefán Ingi 15:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

• It is not a question of trying to render words phonetically. If you think the pronunciation of Voss-strasse needs to be explained to English-readers there are ways of doing that. It is a question of not using a non-English letter-form in an English Wikipedia article.
• I meant of course three of the same consonant in a row - there are many English words with three consonants in a row. Adam 16:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree with your opinion, Adam. I admit that I think it should be written using the ß, but that is not the issue I want to focus on. Your argument against the ß is that this letter is not part of the English alphabet. Thus, it should be substituted with "ss". So far, so good. But then you take it one step further, and change the word beyond ß-ss-substitution, because three ss in a row or capitalisation are not allowed according to English ortography, but Voßstraße is a German word, and I think the most you can do to a German word is make a substitution of a specific German letter to make that word readable to readers unable to familiarise themselves with the ß when reading articles about another culture (I'm sorry, cheap shot). However, I do not see why you should then continue to force English rules of writing on a non-English name. User:Blur4760 17:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC) Uh, and by the way, do you see why your last point is not an answer to what Stefán has said about the szcz-combination (his point being that both szcz and three times the same consonant are forbidden in the English language)? User:Blur4760 17:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with Vossstrasse, because it is not English and therefore the sss does not matter. Charles 20:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't have particularly strong feelings about Voss-strasse versus Vossstrasse, although I prefer the former for the reasons stated above. If there is a majority view in favour of the latter I will not resist a move. I will resist moves to "ß" unless and until there is a formal Wikipedia policy focing me to accept it. I note your typical disdainful attitude towards readers, which lies at the heart of this issue and so many of Wikipedia's problems. Adam 00:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that I have a particular disdainful attitude; as you may have noted from my comment in brackets, I was not completely serious about my remark. I understand your reasons for substituting ß with ss, I just do not agree. I do not consider myself to be outstandingly smart, but still I managed to figure out what characters like ç, ñ or þ mean (where of course the first two are based on standard Latin letters but their pronounciation is rather different), so I don't see why anyone else should not be able to do the same for the ß. Call that disdainful if you must. Blur4760 10:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Irresponsible moves

Regardless of one's opinions of the spelling of the street's name (and we all seem to have pretty strong opinions), cut and paste moves are not the way to make changes. By all means request a move to a particular title, but don't simply cut and paste; that is the worst option. --Stemonitis 12:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Naming poll

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. 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 debate was no consensus. -- Kjkolb 05:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Mark support to each name you support and oppose to each name you oppose. Stefán Ingi 13:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC) Mark # Support each name you approve of.

In an approval vote only Support votes count. You may case a vote for more than one option and tactical voting to help form a consensus is encouraged

Propose name remains at Voss-strasse

1. Support. Shilkanni 16:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Stefán Ingi 13:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC) Withdrawing my votes. Stefán Ingi 14:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Stemonitis 13:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Haukur 13:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Matthead 14:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Blur4760 16:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

2. Support Masterhatch 17:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Strongly oppose  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 18:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Support. Elonka 20:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC) - Removing support. Based on most English-language sources that I have checked, such as Lonely Planet guidebooks, the most common usage appears to be "Vossstrasse", not "Voss-strasse". --Elonka 17:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

3. support Voß is not English; I observe in the discussion below that the German wikipedia doesn't use it either. Septentrionalis 22:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   The German Wikipedia doesn't actually have an article on this street, but the de:Reichskanzlei article spells it "Voßstraße". up+land 13:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

   The fact that the name of the street is Voßstraße is not disputed, see photo in article. Matthead 20:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

   That is the German name of the street, which should not be what we are discussing. Septentrionalis 17:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

   The street has only one name, and no Wikipedia is in a position to challenge it. The discussion here is if English Wikipedia should invented an article name to write about the street, and if so, which invention is "most English".--Matthead 17:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

   Next you will be saying that London and the United States have only one name; yet consider fr:Londres and de:Vereinigte Staaten (among many others for each). Septentrionalis 20:58, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

   VS is a proper translation of US. I had proposed "Voss street", but somebody wanted to create a Frankenword like "Voss-strasse", and call it English on top of that. What's next, an American insisting on "Vo$$-$tra$$e"? --Matthead 12:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

4. Support -- JamesTeterenko 23:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
5. Support-- Bharatveer 10:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
6. Support -- ccwaters 13:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
7. Support: use English alphabet. Bubba ditto 23:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
8. Support. Rebecca 11:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
9. Support: just follow policy and use the English alphabet, otherwise this debate will never end. Thumbelina 17:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Propose move to Voßstraße

1. Support Stemonitis 13:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Support Stefán Ingi 13:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC) Withdrawing my votes. Stefán Ingi 14:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

   Support Haukur 13:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

2. Support Matthead 14:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Support Blur4760 16:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC) I am withdrawing my vote regarding the ß, but I still stand by my opinion that Voss-strasse or Vossstrasse is a seperate issue. Blur4760 16:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose. Shilkanni 16:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Masterhatch 17:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

3. Support  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 18:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose- Bharatveer 10:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

   Absolutely oppose Violation of policy.Septentrionalis 22:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

4. Support. Kusma (討論) 23:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
5. Support. German proper noun with no established English form. up+land 08:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
6. Support, correct name. —Nightstallion (?) 12:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
7. Support, that's the name, there isn't a standard English form, and it's already in Latin alphabet so no transliteration needed. Tkinias 13:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
8. Support and agree with Uppland and Tkinias. Olessi 17:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
9. Support just cut the gordian knot and go with the official name of the street as given by the street-signs, otherwise this topic will never end. Gryffindor 09:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
10. Support Umm... the official sign says 'Voßstraße' so why would anyone call it anything else? Hyenaste ^(tell) 10:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Propose move to Voßstrasse

1. Support Matthead 14:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Blur4760 16:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose. Shilkanni 16:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Masterhatch 17:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 18:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose - Bharatveer 10:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

2. Support Švitrigaila 11:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Propose move to Vossstrasse

1. Support. Shilkanni 16:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Stemonitis 13:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

2. Support Oppose Masterhatch 17:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC) change my vote to support based on the Lonely Planet's usage. Masterhatch 05:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Matthead 17:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 18:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

3. Support Charles 20:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
4. Support. Elonka 20:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC) Note: After having checked multiple English language guidebooks, including Lonely Planet:Berlin, this is now my first choice, as it is how the majority of the books spell the name of the street: "Vossstrasse". --Elonka 04:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

   oppose. Unreadable. Septentrionalis 22:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

5. Support -- JamesTeterenko 23:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
6. Support --Bharatveer 10:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
7. Support Blur4760 16:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Propose move to Voss-Strasse

1. Support. Shilkanni 16:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Blur4760 16:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

2. support Masterhatch 17:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Matthead 17:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 18:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

   Support. Elonka 20:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC) - Withdrawing support. Lonely Planet usage and other English-language sources use "Vossstrasse", not "Voss-Strasse". --Elonka 17:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

3. Support stronglY Septentrionalis 22:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
4. Support -- JamesTeterenko 23:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
5. Support --Bharatveer 10:42, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Just delete the article, the street isn't notable enough for Wikipedia anyway

1. Support. User:Angr 07:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
2. Support ccwaters 13:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
3. Support The Reichskanzlerei is notable, the street isn't. Wikipedia is not a tourist guide. Septentrionalis 16:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

   Oppose Reichskanzlei wasn't exactly a beer hall or similar tourist attraction. --Matthead 17:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

4. Support. The article has no references, and there isn't even an equivalent article on the German wikipedia. If the street were genuinely notable, there would be English-language articles about it (and then we could follow their lead as to how the street was referred to). If there are no articles, it's non-notable, and this page needs to be deleted. --Elonka 23:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
5. Support. Not ultimately notable beyond location of RK. My choices in the items above reflect only my consternation at the original research in the present title.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 17:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• Support Masterhatch 00:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Fine: I will be making the nomination shortly, we can have this discussion there. Septentrionalis 15:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Voss-strasse

---

Add any new proposals above this line ===Propose move to new name===

Discussion

Rules about letters in the "English alphabet" are irrelevant to articles named in German, such as this one. The only correct spelling is therefore the correct German spelling, with ß, following the rules laid down in the German spelling reform of 1996. Stemonitis 13:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

We have been over this several times already. Strasse is spelled S-T-R-A-S-S-E in German and English, and is so spelled here. The only issue is whether it is to be written with or without the German ligature ß, which is not recognised by most English-readers. You know this perfectly well. Wikpedia is not bound by rules on how to write things in Germany, but by its own rules. Until you can cite a Wikipedia rule requiring the use of ß, I will revert your attempts to impose it. Adam 13:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

For anyone interested, this discussion has already been held at length at Talk:Wilhelmstrasse. I would like to get on with writing articles and not be forced to waste my time on stupid pedantic arguments like this. It's nonsense like this drives everyone but pedants and cranks away from Wikipedia. Adam 13:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedians are clearly split right down the middle on the subject of 'ß', 'þ', etc. We've got to have some kind of live-and-let-live policy to prevent edit wars. It seems to me that since Adam is the first and the most committed contributor to the article his preference for the title should be a starting point. He clearly never consented to a move to the ß-version so the burden of filing a move request and showing support for a change should lie with those who want that change. Is that reasonable? As it happens I prefer the ß-version myself, but that's besides the point. Haukur 13:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

That's the first intelligent comment I've heard all night. Note that I have not sought to move or change articles like Friedrichstraße that use the ß. Adam 14:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

What does articles like Friedrichstraße mean? Here [1] you moved Wilhelmstraße to Wilhelmstrasse and here [2] you moved Straße des 17. Juni to Strasse des 17 Juni. Of couse, in both cases this was a significant rewrite. Stefán Ingi 14:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyway I am going to bed now, so you will have your own way for the next nine hours or so. However, to coin a phrase, Ich komme zurück. Adam 14:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Better terminate that ü by using the Austrian cyborg's quote, Ich komme wieder! --Matthead 15:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Gute Nacht, auf Widersehen. Stefán Ingi 14:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the German usage:

• I would just like to add that in my humble opinion as a native German speaker, Straße is NOT spelled S-T-R-A-S-S-E and you are only allowed to do that if you are capitalising the word or if the ß is absolutely not available (of course that does exclude Swiss usage). It is not like Strasse and Straße are two equally valid ways of writing. The German language has a clear preference (and back in school, had I written Strasse, it would have affected my grade significantly).

Regarding my choices:

• I support Voßstraße, because I believe that articles about a subject using an untranslated name stemming from a language using a variant of the Latin alphabet should spell that very article according to the rules of that very language with any additional letters (so should anyone ever need me to support the þ, I'll be there)
• I oppose Voßstrasse, because I do not see why one should substitute one ß but not the other.
• I have no feelings regarding Vossstrasse. I consider it to be the far inferior second best option.
• I oppose Voss-strasse and Voss-Strasse (the latter a bit weaker), because I cannot understand Adam's argument about the three-consonant-rule. Maybe Vossstrasse would be forbidden in English, but it still is a German word, so I do not see why you should force English rules on it (compare with the Szczecin argument)

Blur4760 16:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• So we have an article in the English wikipedia, using German government imposed spelling? ccwaters 13:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Just delete the article, the street isn't notable enough for Wikipedia anyway

You don't think the street where Hitler's Chancellery was located is notable? Tell that to all World War II buffs with maps and cameras wandering up and down looking for the Fuhrerbunker. Adam 08:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Adam, I noticed that you removed the {{unreferenced}} template that I'd placed on the page, saying that the info on the page was "common knowledge". Can you prove this? Can you point to any English-language books or articles about the street, to prove its notability? --Elonka 23:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• en.Wikipedia now has a million articles and is running ahead of all other encyclopaedias, including de.Wikipedia, in its depth of coverage. If we are the only encyclopaedia with an article on this street, that should be a cause of satisfaction, not carping. I look forward to every street in every city in the world having an article. If people spent less time harrassing me and more time editing, we would have more articles.
• I am required to reference the fact that Voss-strasse runs between Ebertstrasse and Wilhelmstrasse? That the Reich Chancellery stood at the corner of Wilhelmstrasse and Voss-strasse? The location of the Canadian Embassy? This amounts to harrassment. Adam 23:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Please don't take it personally. I think the article reads well, it is laid out in an interesting way, and your work is appreciated. But, though the article is interesting, it's not appropriate for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a travel guide. This issue of whether there should be an article for every street is actually something that's already been discussed extensively. It's agreed that it's appropriate to have a Wikipedia article on every city, but in terms of streets, the general consensus (at least, as I read it), is that only a very few streets should have articles, and only if the street is extremely famous (such as Broadway or the Champs Elysees). To read these previous discussions for yourself, try checking here Wikipedia:Deletion_policy/Roads_and_streets. Something else I would like to suggest as well, is that you may wish to consider adding your street information to Wikitravel, where I'm sure that your efforts and energy would be most welcome. --Elonka 05:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

What makes a street notable? The Champs Elysees is just a strip of asphalt like any other. What makes it notable is that it is in the heart of a great city and that it has interesting things to see along it. The same is true of Voss-strasse. I went quite deliberately to find it, not as a tourist but as a historian, to see the site of one of the most important buildings in modern European history. Others who intend going to Berlin to visit its historical sites may well visit Wikipedia in the expectation of finding useful historical information about this and other streets. That's what an encyclopaedia is for. And since we have no restrictions of space, I don't see why we can't have as many articles on as many subjects as people care to take the time to write about. Adam 09:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

By the standards of Wikipedia:Notability (and my own), a street becomes notable not by where it is, but by what is written about it. Yes, the Champs Elysees is a strip of asphalt, but it's also been written about, sung about, been the subject of paintings by famous artists, and had many other outside references to it. That is what makes it notable. To my knowledge, the Voss-strasse's main claim to fame is that it's near some tourist attractions, and had some government offices built along it at one point. As such, it may be worth a paragraph in the articles of one of those attractions (or maybe the biography of the person that the street is named after), but I still don't think that the subject is worthy of its own article on Wikipedia. If, however, you can point to a book about the street, a song about the street, or a reference to the street in a famous painting or play or some other major work, that might change my mind. --Elonka 17:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

All the fuss

I don't know what all the fuss is about. This is the English section of wikipedia and therefore the rules of English should prevail. Wikipedia:Naming conventions states it perfectly in the opening nutshell: "Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." Sorry, but Voßstraße, Voßstrasse, and Vossstrasse do not fit the policy aforementioned. "ß" is not an English character and therefore should not be found in any English article title, and this is an English article about a German street. Blur said, "so I do not see why you should force English rules on it". That is funny because this isn't the German wikipedia, it is the English wikipedia and English has its own rules and we should follow them. German spelling rules are irrelevant here. So, i ask blur, why should german rules be forced on English? Look, the naming convention is quite clear, to use titles that are familar to the average speaker of English. Most english speakers don't know what "ß" is or even how to pronounce it. Simply, we shouldn't be using non English characters in titles in English wikipedia. If you want to use "ß", then go to the German wikipedia and fill your boots. Masterhatch 18:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Long question, short answer: This is the English Wikipedia, but Voßstraße is a German word, thus my opinion that it should be written using German ortography, not English one. And, furthermore, I dare to say that most English readers have no idea how to pronounce the German word Voßstraße whether it is written using the ß or the ss. Sorry if that was disdainful. Blur4760 18:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

You still didn't answer my very important question: why should german rules be forced on English in an English encyclopaedia? you don't see English rules being forced on the german seciton of wikipedia, now do you? Look, it is simple, this is the enlish language section of wikipedia, so let's stick with English, not german. "Voßstraße" is not an english word and it contains characters that are foreign to English. So, i say to you, if you insist on using "ß" in English titles, then may i suggest that you stick to editing on the german version of wikipeida where they gladly accept those characters. (sorry if that was disdainful) Masterhatch 22:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Please read WP:UE; also, if the German wikipedia can (and I think should) use de:Vereinigte Staaten and de:Elsass, why not? They don't use de:Pennsylvanien - I think they should. Septentrionalis 22:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought I did answer that. I don't want to force German rules on English, only on words that are German. Voßstraße (or, to a much lesser amount, Vossstrasse) are German words, Voss-strasse absolutely not, Voss-Strasse may be a German word, but not the name of the street, so either translate the name of the street (which is not wished for), or spell it correctly, don't make up ways of writing a German word. Blur4760 05:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

why would you want to force German words on English? That is the exact reason why i am so against nonEnglish characters being used. All over wikipedia, i see people trying to force their native language onto English and telling me that English is spelling it wrong. Sorry, but English is English and it isn't spelt wrong in English. English has its quirks, but it is still English. The naming convention is quite clear about using the form most commonly found in English (not german) and the form that is most recognisable to the average English speaker. German words and characters are obviously not English and if their is an Engilsh equivellant, then it should be used 100% of the time. If you don't like it, go edit the german language section of wikipedia and stop forcing german words where there are english equivellants. Masterhatch 07:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The commonest spelling (in English) is not the current "Voss-strasse". It's very difficult to get an accurate count from a web search, because the search engines know to convert "ß" to "ss" and vice versa, but I'm pretty sure that Voss-strasse is not top of the list. If someone can get some decent figures, I'm sure we'd all be interested to hear them. --Stemonitis 07:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Most English speakers have no idea how to pronounce Mousehole (or Southwark), and most English speakers can not agree on how to pronounce Newcastle. And I know that Germans way of pronouncing Worcestershire sauce is not quite the same as it is pronounced in Worcestershire, but in none of these cases does it stop someone reading an article about the subject. What is important here is what do the WP:NCs say about such names:

Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.

No word containing an "ß" character is going to be "second nature" to the majority of English speaking people. --Philip Baird Shearer 21:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

True, but neither will a word starting with a 'v' which wants you to pronounce itself with an [f]. Haukur 21:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

My comment was in regards to the argument that most English readers have no idea how to pronounce the ß. If they have no idea how to pronounce the word altogether, one more letter does not change much in that outcome (that very same argument of course goes in any foreign language edition of WP) (Wooster, isn't it?). Blur4760 21:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

So basically, Masterhatch, what you are saying is that any variant of Voßstraße, Vossstrasse, Voss-strasse or Voss-Strasse that will be decided upon will be an English word and ceases to have any connection with its Germanness? Even though "Strasse" and "Straße" don't have any meaning in English? You deny the possibility of using non-English words in English WP? You are arguing that Champs-Élysées is an English word as well? Or Dáil Éireann? Thus, in German WP, de:Central_Intelligence_Agency is a German word, and should be written de:central_Intelligenceagency? If that is the case, I will stop any further argument because then our premises are too irreconcilable. But before that, I would just like to mention that I have seen cases where Straße is written Strasse, and although I do not prefer it, I could live with that, if English WP decides to abandon all non-standard letters (which I believe would be wrong). However, never have I seen constructions like Voss-strasse in any English text. Blur4760 16:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Obviously there are foreign words in English. In fact, most of English is based on foreign words! My point is, English has developed a style that does not include foreign characters most of the time. and the ß is a foreign character that English has not adopted. Since English has not adopted it, and the only places i have ever seen that are here on wikipedia and in Germany and Austria when i visited there. I didn't even see any in Switzerland. My point is, I never see that ß here in Canada anywhere and since the naming convention is quite clear on the matter, ß should not appear in article titles. There is a standard set of rules when translating South Korean to English for place names. I consider this ß just as foreign of a character as ㅃ. I wouldn't expect to see ㅃ in an article title any more than i would expect to see ß in an article title. When ㅃ is translated into English, bb is used. bb does not make the same sound as ㅃ, but it is close enough. I am not familiar with German, but i bet that the English ss sound is not the same as the ß german sound. My point is, there seems to be a way to translate ß into English and that way seems to be ss. Whether this makes Germans happy or not doesn't really matter because this is English and we have our 26 letters and we aren't asking for any more. Masterhatch 18:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, Masterhatch, our discussion began by you quoting my part about forcing English rules on a German word. But that I only said in regard to Voss-strasse and Voss-Strasse: I disagree about the use of foreign characters, but I accept other people's opinion about it, and their urgent need to transliterate, so I could live with Vossstrasse, but Voss-strasse and -Strasse I am not happy with because that is forcing English rules on the German word (which, in our case, is also a proper name, so should not have to conform to any rules of writing). And by the way, the Canadian Government uses the ß here. Blur4760 19:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I just looked at the map I posted to support my argument that ß is used in Canada, and I have to say the the Canadian Government has the most tolerant policy about ß I have ever seen; appearently that pdf-file was created by several people... (they spell it Voßstrasse by the way, which seems the wrongest of all). Blur4760 20:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I suppose this will not win any big support, but I'd like to see it as Vossstraße; "-straße" is known among people with only the slightest acquaintance with German, whereas "Voß" isn't. Chonak 20:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

SSS

List of unusual English words#Repeated letters says: "A number of English words have three of the same letter in sequence, but almost all are constructions involving a suffix, and could arguably be hyphenated or, in some cases, written as two words. They include brasssmith, headmistressship, wallless (lacking walls), and bulllike (like a bull). The OED contains the word frillless. / Other candidates are the archaic agreeeth (third person singular present tense of the verb to agree), and tweeer ... Place-names include Rossshire and Invernessshire, both in Scotland, UK (though both of these counties are usually hyphenated in official documentation)"

"we have encountered curious forms such as crosssection, and the complete Oxford English Dictionary does contain instances of frillless, bossship, countessship, duchessship, governessship, and princessship, and the county name Rossshire. " [3] Saint|swithin 20:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Origin of the name

Hey, Matthead, you were one second faster than me about the origin of the name, Congratulations. Anyway, I'm sorry about deleting the reference about de:Sophie Marie Gräfin von Voss, but since she died almost 60 years before the street was built, I didn't see any connection with the name. Blur4760 18:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

No prob, I linked her article just to provide a first step for further research, and to show that there was a family by that name. Next was a weird experience courtesy of Google [4] --Matthead 21:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I would propose to change the name Ferdinand Graf von Voss-Buch, because Graf is actually his title not his name. I know the source writes it that way, but that is most likely due to the fact that nowadays, there are no titles of nobility in Germany and Graf would indeed be his name. But back then, it was a title and although I have no source for the particularly person in question, anyone interested in the process of name-changing in Germany after the revolution, I recommend reading the court decision's I have listed here. Thus, I propose to follow the example set by the Bismarck article, and to anglicise the title, move it before the name, and leave the indication of the territory in its German version: Count Ferdinand von Voss-Buch. Anyone who disagrees? Blur4760 16:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

A stated before, Voß and Voss are names, some bear the name with ß, others with ss, and is is IMHO anything but helpful to remove that difference intentionally. I met persons who had strong feelings on the proper spelling of their name, e.g. persons named Schaefer that did not want to be spelt like the more common Schäfer carr. --Matthead 17:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I was more concernced with the position of the "Graf" than the spelling of the Voß/ Voss. That's another fight to fight. Blur4760 22:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

How Germans write their names in Germany is no more relevant to this article than how Chinese write their names in China. "ß" is not a letter of the Roman alphabet, it is a ligature used only in German-speaking countries. For English-readers the name must be rendered "Voss," just as we render 邓小平 as "Deng Xiaoping" and as we render Rudolph Heß Rudolph Hess (are you attempting to move that article, by the way?). Adam 22:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Where we are at

It is obvious from the voting both here and at Wilhelmstrasse that there is no consensus on this question. I gather from remarks made by other editors that this is a long-running Wikipedia dispute, and we are not going to resolve it by arguing here. The obvious course is therefore that those who wish to write acticles about German topics using "ß" should do so, and leave those of us who prefer to use "ss" alone so we can get on with editing and stop wasting our time with this pointless nonsense. Adam 04:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

This seems a reasonable compromise. It is more generous to non-English spelling than policy (or kindness to monoglot anglophones) would suggest; but I certainly haven't proposed any changes from ß to ss, Septentrionalis 16:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the results of Germany and England at the current World Cup (counting previous ones would be a little unfair to the Empire) should define the spelling? Football is like English language, the English may once have created it, but others have taken over since, introducing new tricks and turns. --Matthead 17:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

That's more or less the situation we already have because an ß-related vote never gains a consensus to move. I first observed this more than half a year ago [5] and as far as I know it has remained true. If we were to make a rule that the first and/or most prolific contributor gets to decide (as per my move to the current location against my own preference) then e.g. Weissenburg in Bayern should be moved to Weißenburg in Bayern because that was the preference of the creator (User:Markussep) and the most prolific editor (User:Edinborgarstefan). Alternatively we could grandfather in all existing titles but apply the rule on articles created in the future. The challenge is to get a large enough consensus for this so that someone who shows up in the future doesn't just say: "Hey, I never heard about an agreement like that. Death to ß! / Long live ß!!" Haukur 18:13, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Who on earth decided to name the article "Voss-strasse", that is totally wrong. It's either "Voßstraße" or "Voßstrasse", but not this bizarre mishmash. Gryffindor 09:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Just as a bythought:have a look at the picture...isn't it Voßstraße? Lectonar 14:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

This isn't, however, the German Wikipedia. Writing the street name in a way that is going to be read by the vast majority of English speakers as "Voss-strabe" is silly, to say the least. Rebecca 14:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Just being cheeky: wouldn't it be read Vobstrabe then ? ;) Btw, I could settle for Voßstrasse anyway, but Gryffindor is right...did someone think about googling it in English and see what comes up? Lectonar 14:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

addendum: Have a look at WP:Name..although I admit there is no real policy regarding street names, there is a link regarding Swiss municipalities where one tends to use the local names when there is no definitive Englsih name..couldn't that be used as a crutch to get this discussion somewhere? Lectonar 14:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• We are using the local name, which is Voss-strasse. No-one is suggesting "Voss Street." The dispute is how to write the name.
• On another matter, I note the exceedingly high standard of citation which is being demanded of this small and inoffensive article. I recommend to those editors responsible that they take care to provide citations the next time they write "the sun rises in the east" or "Paris is the capital of France." I will be watching. Adam 05:50, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, here an English language search on Google:

• for "Voss-strasse" -"Voßstraße" -"Voss Strasse": about 30 pages, many of them names like Werner-Voss-Strasse or Bernhard-Voss-Strasse
• for "Vossstrasse" -"Voßstraße": 277 pages
• and (just for informational purposes): "Voßstraße" -"Vossstrasse": 352 pages

Adam, I was wondering: am I on the list of editors you are watching, because, after the cumbersome job of referencing most of the article, I dared to ask you for a source for a sentence that someone else flagged as unreferenced, a sentence I did not delete, and for which I never expressed any intention to be deleted? Blur4760 17:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• That's for me to know and you to wonder.
• You omitted to include "Vobstrabe" which gets 55 hits. Since when was truth and falsehood dictated by google anyway?
• I have better things to do than argue forever about this incredibly petty matter, and I would hope you all do too. There is obviously no consensus on either renaming or moving the article, so I suggest you all go and write some articles. Adam 07:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Either you translate it to Voss Street or you leave it as a proper name as Voßstraße. Everything else is an abomination (except if you are Swiss and don't have the ß, then you can do Vossstrasse), especially Voss-strasse, does that even follow English naming rules? --84.184.110.108 13:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Or, if we are speakers of English, who do not use the ß either. Rebecca 13:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Umlaut and ß sources

At Wikipedia:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board/Umlaut and ß I've been putting together some examples of how English language publications deal with ß and umlauts. Would anyone like to contribute? Discussions using reason and argument have so far only ended in stalemates, and I am hoping that if we can agree on how the matter is usually dealt with in printed English it might give us some clues on how to do so at Wikipedia. Saint|swithin 11:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I've looked through my bookshelves and so far none of the English language books I have use the ß: all of them replace it with "ss", as do the newspapers I read, so the page mentioned above now has a strong anti-ß bias. All those in favour of ß please look on your bookshelves and contribute to Wikipedia:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board/Umlaut and ß to even things out a bit! Saint|swithin 07:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

St Swithin conducts some empirical research, his findings contradict his preconceptions, so he tries to rig his research to get the results he wants! A fine example of the historical method. Any unbiased review of English academic texts on German history will show the overwhelming majority do not use "ß". For example, I have about twenty books on Nazi Germany, all but one (Fest, Plotting Hitler's Death) says "Hess" rather than "Heß". This is because academic books are edited by professional publishers' editors, not amateur fetishists and uber-pedantic show-offs like Wikipedia. Adam 09:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Saintswithin has not voted on this subject, as she would like to avoid preconceptions. She compiles a list of how umlauts and ß are used in English language publications (e.g. academic books) to try to avoid arguments based on preconceptions. On discovering that the ß is apparently not used at all, she does not want to hurt the feelings of those who have voted for the ß, so writes a note here in a friendly way, suggesting that they contribute to the list: one aim of this is to kindly point out that there is little support for their belief. She suggests that people put examples on the "Umlaut and ß" page. This suggestion also applies to User:Adam Carr. Saint|swithin 09:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I apologise for misrepresenting St Swithin's motives, and also for assigning her to the wrong gender (although given that Saint Swithun was a man it's hard to see how I could have avoided that.) The rest of my comment stands. Adam 10:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Saintswithin agrees heartily with the message behind Adam's argument that it would be a good idea to take well-written books as an example for Wikipedia. She will forgive Adam his somewhat brusque style, as despite her wish to avoid preconceptions, Adam looks a bit like her husband. She intends to write entirely in the third person in future, rather like a talk in the House of Commons, and would like to mention, as a clue to her choice of name, that it is her birthday on Saturday. Saint|swithin 10:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I wish the Honourable and Learned Lady a happy birthday, and may the saints preserve me from looking like anyone's husband. Adam 10:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

In summary

I hope everyone is pleased with themselves for wasting so much of their time and mine on this stupid argument, for no outcome whatever, as could have been predicted from the start. I suggest everyone go and write one original article to redeem themselves. Adam 05:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• If I wrote an article about a subject that I was genuinely fascinated with, maybe did it as a labour of love, wanted to share that knowledge with others, and then got embroiled in weeks of codswallop on how to spell the name of a street, when mine was one of several quite acceptable versions in the first place, and stuff about whether the article should remain on Wikipedia at all, then I'd start to wonder a. just what do people want from Wikipedia and b. was it all worth my while right from the start? We have to be prepared to see our work changed by others, but if a better article emerges at the end of the process then so be it. But when some people get carried away by small matters where it's not even the actual information content of the article that's being questioned, it's enough to make you lose heart. Keep up the good work. As someone who regards Berlin as the most fascinating city on the planet, and Voss Strasse (however it's spelt), one of its defining locations, I believe your work has an important place here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.217.153 (talk • contribs) on July 13, 2006

Voss-strasse-krieg II

Since ProhibitOnions has chosen to reopen hostilities on this front, I am going to seek a formal policy determination that "ß" be banned from all article titles. Adam 00:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll support you on that one. --Elonka 00:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

First I will have to figure out how to do it. Adam 01:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Bush has declared war against a word, and now you guys declare war against a single letter? What next, war against pixels? -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       02:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn't start this war, but since it has become an issue, it needs to be resolved one way or the other. If Wikipedia in its collective wisdom decides that "ß" is acceptable in article titles, I will accept that. My view, however, is that non-English letterforms should not be used in the titles of English articles. If "Voßstraße" is acceptable, why not 北京 or القاهرة? Adam 02:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, let's put aside Adam's "war" talk. We can agree to disagree regarding special characters such as ß. However, Elonka immediately reverted someone's good-faith rewriting of the article because it happened to use correct spellings.

Regardless of the ß issue, the onus is still on Adam to answer the following: Can you point to any source, anywhere, that writes this street name with a hyphen and lowercase "straXXe"? Any other street name, German or otherwise, that is written in lowercase? Otherwise, the recasting of Voßstraße or Vossstrasse as "Voss-strasse" falls under original research.

German has very specific rules regarding hyphenation and casing. "Voss-strasse" is wrong. So is "Voß-straße", for that matter. Since neither Elonka nor Adam speaks German, it's a little hard convincing them that these things are more than just fine details or a desire for edit warring. However, Germans writing in English often make the opposite mistakes with English names ("Downing-street 10"), which is about how "Voss-strasse" looks.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 08:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

We have been over this many times, but I will say it one more time. This is not a dispute about spelling. The German word for street is strasse, spelled S-T-R-A-S-S-E, and that is how I spell it in all the articles I have edited or created. The only question is how the double-S is to be written. In both Germany and England there arose a custom of using a double-S ligature: writing the two Ss with one character (see here for examples). In the English-speaking world this usage died out in the 19th century, but it persisted in Germany and is now standard for the lower-case double-S. This, however, is the English Wikipedia, and article titles must be written in the Roman alphabet according to English rules of usage. Thus we write Beijing rather than 北京 and Cairo rather than القاهرة. The principle here is exactly the same. "ß" is not a letter of the English alphabet, and cannot be used in English article titles, since it is not recognised by the great majority of English-speaking people. What is done in Germany, what the German rules of orthography might be, and what German-speakers might think about the matter is, with great respect, totally irrelevant - just as my opinion is irrelevant if the German Wikipedia wants to say that the British Prime Minister lives at Downingstraße 10. As for the hyphen, I have said that I will accept Vossstrasse if that is prefered by majority of interested editors, although the triple-S looks odd to English-speakers. I have set this position out several times already, and I don't intend having another endless circular argument with ProhibitOnions about it. I will seek a firm policy decision on the matter, I will abide by whatever the verdict is, and I will expect him to do the same. Adam 09:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Did you read what I wrote above?  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 10:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Of course. Adam 10:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

So why are you still going on about the ß?  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 10:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Because you moved the article back to "Voßstraße", thus reopening the dispute. Adam 10:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

No, that was Elonka's revert; if she's going to pretend there was ever a consensus, then anything goes. And, despite your assertion above, ß is considered a letter of the German alphabet, not just a way of writing two letters; it is similar to, but not identical to, the former practice in English and other languages of a compound final double s; and more importantly, it still exists. It was a big part of the German spelling reform of 1996, in which, I should add, I strongly supported its abolition (as well as the abolition of capitalizing nouns), which many people expected to happen. However, instead, the pointy-heads instead came up with a new and illogical set of rules for using it. Be that as it may, we can't wish it away, except in Switzerland, where a vastly different form of German is spoken. As I also mentioned, hyphenation is also far less free than in English, because it is used to build compound nouns that would otherwise be declined.

I propose the following: Rename the article "Vossstrasse." This will eliminate the objections regarding the hyphenation and capitalization issues, and leave the ß/ss issue aside (and in your "favor") until a consensus regarding special characters can be reached.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 10:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

• (cur) (last) 21:56, 10 September 2006 ProhibitOnions (Talk | contribs) m (moved Voss-strasse to Voßtraße: The version with the hyphen is original research, not found in any literature. We have the full character set here; spell it as the street signs spell it.) I will be charitable and assume your memory has failed you.
• Whether or not it is a letter of the German alphabet, that is irrelevant because we are not writing German here. How many times do I have to make this simple point?
• Be that as it may, I accept your proposal to move the article to Vossssssstrasse. Adam 11:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that this matter can be cleared up using logic. You can explain the use of ß with logic, and you can explain the non-use of ß with logic, as has been demonstrated across several miles of Wikipedia discussion. Perhaps it would be more constructive to take a different approach: Wikipedia:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board/Umlaut and ß - at the moment this seems to show that the ß is more often avoided, but not always. I think a little more evidence would be useful. If anyone has any paper English language encyclopaedias they could consult it would be nice of you to contribute. Saint|swithin 14:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I have Britannica, Colliers and Funk & Wagnall - all give Rudolf Hess and not Rudolf Heß. Adam 14:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

If you could look up Grosse Füge, Strauss, Vossstrasse etc. and add some to the list, it would be marvellous. Saint|swithin 15:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think we should have a unified policy on the ß - it just seems to anger people when their articles are moved, and doesn't help much. Changing ß to ss is usually a much smaller error than changing Polish ł to l or French ç to c. Current practice seems to be to use the ß in articles written by German speakers about topics of mostly local interest (like the names of places or people without a large impact in English-language newspapers, for example Aschersleben-Staßfurt) but to drop it for really famous subjects (like Rudolf Hess or Michael Gross (swimmer)). Actually, most foreign Wikipedias seem to follow the same convention, probably governed by the principle of least surprise. Whether codifying this would actually help prevent arguing about article titles is not clear to me, though. Kusma (討論) 15:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I would support a move of the article to "Vossstrasse", since that seems to be the more common spelling in the English-language sources that I've checked. --Elonka 19:00, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Potential policy change

In order to seek a formal determination that Wikipedia articles should not include a "ß", you need to ensure that it's written up on a "guideline" page. To get something to guideline status, you start with a "proposed guideline" page.

I'd recommend that you start by reading WP:UE, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics), and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (thorn), along with their associated talk pages. The closest to what you want to do, I think, is the "thorn" discussion, which was a proposal that never made it as far as official guideline status. If you still want to take on the project though, I would read the "thorn" page carefully, including its talk page, try to analyze what they did and didn't do right, and then create a Naming conventions page as a "proposed policy", like Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ß) (or does the character have another "English" name?), and include some of the data from Wikipedia:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board/Umlaut and ß. Once the wording of the proposed guideline is nailed down, you'd want to get community consensus to make it a "formal" guideline. The next step past that is policy, but I think that formal guideline status would probably be sufficient. --Elonka 19:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I will proceed as indicated. I will include the thorn and the other Icelandic letter whose name I forget. There ought to be a general ban on non-English letterforms in titles. In this I do not' include accents and diacriticals such as the Polish "Ł" Adam 00:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, we haven't had a proposed policy for outlawing Þ for almost a week now, [6], it was sorely missed. Stefán Ingi 00:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Since the problem at this page (and no other pages have been moved recently to my knowledge) is based on the hyphen, not the ß, a policy on ß seems not to be the best solution. Perhaps a policy decision on triple letters and their (un-)acceptability would be more relevant. All parties have declared their acceptance of the title Vossstrasse. --Stemonitis 09:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes but we also have Bernauer Straße, Bundesstraße 2, Bundesstraße 5, Friedrichstraße, Straße des 17. Juni, Motzstraße, Wilhelmstraße and probably others. All need to be moved to conform to English usage. Not to mention a monstrosity like Björn Þórðarson (just to keep Stefan happy). Adam 09:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

That's a matter for a separate discussion. Again, there seems to be some sort of consensus regarding the hyphen-followed-by-lowercase-strasse issue, because lowercase "strasse" is wrong. FWIW, in German triple letters have only been allowed since the controversial 1996 reform. If there's an objection to that, then "Voss-Strasse" (hyphen and uppercase S) or "Voss Strasse" (separate words, uppercase) have precedents in German usage, though this particular street is written together.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 10:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why Adam thinks that calling someones name a monstrosity will make me happy. If Björn were still alive I would have removed this comment citing WP:LIVING but for some reason the policy on Wikipedia does not give the same respect to dead people. Stefán Ingi 10:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

• ProhibitOnions, for about the 25th time, what is right or wrong, or what is or was done or not done, in German is totally irrelevant to this discussion. All that is relevant here is what facilitates English-speakers being able to read article titles. I have agreed to Vossstrasse not because of any usage past or present in German but because it gets rid of "ß", which is my objective here. (Actually my objective is to write encyclopaedia articles, but since you persist in wasting my time with this nonsense I will have to deal with this first.)

Do you know what "FWIW" means, Adam?  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 11:06, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

In English, German or Icelandic? Adam 11:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

• Stefan, I'm not going to be provoked by deliberately obtuse comments like that one. Adam 10:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, we have agreed to move the article to Vossstrasse, so why doesn't one of the people who advocated the move now carry it out? Adam 14:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Recent move, still against consensus, should be reverted

Archive 1 shows a no-consensus naming poll on suggested alternatives to the Voss-strasse name then used, closed 13 July 2006. So why was this article subsequently moved by User:ProhibitOnions, twice on 10 September 2006 eventually ending up at [[Voßstraße], reverted by User:Rebecca early on 11 Sep (UTC) to Voss-strasse, then moved again by User:ProhibitOnions on 21 September to Vossstrasse?

The brief discussion, without notice to interested parties through WP:RM, in the discussion above is not sufficient to override the previous lack of consensus after extended discussion. Gene Nygaard 01:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

As near as I can tell, the predominant usage of the term in English-language sources, is "Vossstrasse". This corresponds with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). --Elonka 09:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the more common English usages haven't even been considered here, either in the archived discussion or since. And ProhibitOnions makes a silly claim above about Voss-Strasse being original research; in fact, that particular form is more likely to be seen in German language usage than in English-language usage, though it is seen in the latter. But where is the consideration of, and where are the redirects from, the common English-language forms? Why are Voss Strasse, Voss strasse, Voss street, and Voss Street still all redlinks? The unhyphenated form is more common in English. The variations in capitalization of street/strasse may be in part a national varieties of English issue; there certainly are differences in how common capitalization is, both geographically and chronologically. Gene Nygaard 10:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

No, I said that "Voss-strasse" was not right, and possibly OR. If you read what I wrote, I mentioned the hyphenated version ("Voss-Strasse") as a secondary non-ß choice only if "Strasse" is in uppercase. You will not see "-strasse" (lowercase) in German, a language in which nouns are always capitalized. Silly me.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 11:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

And should this not also logically apply to Friedrichstraße, Straße des 17. Juni, Wilhelmstraße etc? Adam 09:36, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps in large part. But there is one huge, significant difference—Friedrichstrasse is never written with a triple s. And triple letters in one word definitely are avoided in English usage. Gene Nygaard 10:40, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

The triple S is a minor matter. The use of "ß", which very few English-readers recognise, is a much more important question. Adam 10:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe Gene Nygaard can point us to sources that back his claim that Voss-strasse or Voss Street or whatever is more commonly used than Vossstrasse. Because we have an English language source that spells it Vossstrasse. Furthermore, I find it interesting that my view is diametrically opposed to Adam's. For me, ß or ss was always a minor question. On the other hand, and it may be because I am a native German, I find making up street names like Voss-strasse makes WP look stupid (pardon my choice of words). Blur4760 22:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

That little word "an" speaks volumes, doesn't it? Gene Nygaard 22:43, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

One is more than zero. Plus, for instance, the Canadian embassy writes it all kinds of way, but always without a hyphen. (Or a space, for that matter. They write Voßstrasse on their website.) Blur4760 23:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Of the poßible variants of spelling not using the "ß", we have settled on Vossstrasse as the variant least objectionable to all interested parties. I see no point in canvaßing that ißue further. The real ißue here is the use of "ß" at the English Wikipedia, to which I remain adamantly opposed. It is only Wikipedia's lack of a workable proceß for agreeing on policies that prevents me from getting it banned. Adam 01:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

No, Adam, it's also the large number of people whose opinions are different from yours that prevent that step being taken. There is no consensus in either direction: that's why the issue keeps cropping up. --Stemonitis 09:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

No, no, Adam is absolutely right; of course all people who disagree with him, like me and Angr, must be complete and utter idiots out of principle. Oh, how could we ever not notice our own ignorance. </sarcasm> —Nightstallion (?) 19:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Well said, Nightstallion. I award you the title Hero of Socialist Self-Criticism, First Class, with oak leaves and diamonds. Adam 00:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I am not worthy. </sarcasm> —Nightstallion (?) 20:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Far be it from me to dispel such displays of true Socialist modesty; but Adam is right; we did have a poll on this, which can be found in the archives, and the Germanist position did not prevail. I have moved back accordingly. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the Germanist position did not prevail because others believed the usuage in Adam 01:02, 30 October 2006(UTC) to be neither sarcastic nor stupid, but correct. Barliner 15:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hoax

I am sorely tempted to put {{Hoax}} on this article. I live in Berlin and can assure all readers that there is no street called "Vossstrasse" here. There is a street called Voßstraße, however, but for some reason we're not allowed to have an article about it. The fact that there is a poll in the archive indicating a lack of consensus to move this article to the correct spelling of this name is irrelevant. Polls are evil, and at Wikipedia, accuracy takes precedence over ochlocracy. —Angr 07:53, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. The recent renaming is an embarrassment. -- Evertype·✆ 12:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The poll was about a year ago, thus the Frankensteinish assembly of letters was on public display long enough. Let's go ahead and make the request to move the article to the name which is on display on the actual signs in the street, Voßstraße. Are there some humor archives on Wiki where the odd construct "sss" can be mentioned? -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       13:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, let's move it back. Haukur 13:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Glad to do so. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 15:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Content updated to Voßstraße, too. -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       15:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that was fast! ProhibitOnions ^(T) 15:35, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Same for half a dozen redirects. Seems all articles had used Voßstraße anyway. -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       15:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Was there some RM discussion that I missed? The article should be at Vossstrasse, per the majority of English-language sources. --Elonka 19:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Not that I know of, but my recent additions of web links might be of interest to you. Voßstraße is used in English-language sources by native speakers of English like Iain Boyd Whyte is professor of architectural history at the University of Edinburgh (okay, so he is probably a Scotsman). Being exposed to the odd Umlaut (diacritic) now and then may be appreciated by some of those who "would like to be able to speak many more languages". -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       02:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

There was no consensus for such a clearly controversial move. I recommend that the article be moved back to Vossstrasse, and that proper WP:RM procedures be followed. --Elonka 17:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

And it has been, twice now. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)