Talk:Zürich Town Hall
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Mike Cline in topic Requested move 13 January 2016
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Requested move 13 January 2016
edit- 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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Not moved Mike Cline (talk) 11:36, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Zürich Town Hall → Rathaus, Zürich – Following (local) conventions – ZH8000 (talk) 10:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 09:16, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
- This is a contested technical request (permalink). EdJohnston (talk) 18:36, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: See Category:Seats of local government. There is no uniformity on whether to use the local names for town halls. This needs a discussion and reasons should be given. 'Following local conventions' is unclear. EdJohnston (talk) 18:36, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment My request is based on the following:
- On en-WP, there is a strong tendency in articles about Swiss subjects to prefer the local naming (instead of somehow translated and somehow arbitrarily translated). ... Because of better recognizability, perhaps?
- Rathaus is also the name of the building, not only its function.
- There are many Rathäuser in German Sprachraum, actually almost in every town, so we do indeed need a disambiguation. Here, the most general is Zurich.
- Therefore I propose to move it to "Rathaus, Zürich". And eventually to claim it a naming scheme. -- ZH8000 (talk) 16:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
- So you would rename everyting in Category:City and town halls in Germany to use the 'Rathaus' form? And you would use comma disambiguation rather than parentheses? Back in 2013 there was a move request for German train stations at Talk:Kaiserslautern Hauptbahnhof#Requested move. The logic was more obvious there because 'Hauptbahnhof' was not adequately translated by 'central station', and there was chance of confusion. There were some good comments in that discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 19:04, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, the current list is quite diverse: some use "<building>, <place>", some "<building> <place>", some "<place> <building>", and other even use "<building> (<place>)", while bulding can be either Rathaus, Town Hall, or City Hall!! Nothing what I would call a distinctive pattern, nor even a convention. ;-) -- ZH8000 (talk) 12:32, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
- There is an additional issue here that "Rathaus" also refers to city quarter of the same name. Rathaus (Zurich) currently directs to a section of the Altstadt (Zürich) article that deals with this quarter. The current proposal would create a very confusing situation. In addition, Rathaus, Zürich is the format normally used for districts/quarters/neighborhoods whereas Rathaus (Zurich) would be for a building. — AjaxSmack 00:28, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
- I acknowledge your input. So I agree that there is no reason to use the <Building>, <place> pattern anymore (if you are right). But see also my answer to EdJonston above about the missing pattern in general. Actually, the "<building> (<place>)" pattern is rather seldomly used for Rathäuser! -- ZH8000 (talk) 12:32, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
- Besides: So, Rathaus (Zurich) should actually refer to the Town Hall article, but Rathaus, Zürich should refer to the quarter of the district, but does the opposite!?! – There is already a lot of confusion ;-) -- ZH8000 (talk) 12:40, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Switzerland is not an English speaking locality; WP:USEENGLISH what is the most common form in English? -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 07:06, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.