On Wednesday 11 December 2002 04:00 am, wikien-l-request(a)wikipedia.org wrote:
Hold on! Let's not get carried away! This most
recent debate affected
only a handful of countries with very special problems. For most
countries the short form is not problematical, and these articles can
carry on just as they are. [[History of the French Republic]] may be a
perfectly valid article when [[History of France]] needs to broken into
smaller chunks, but it's not an immediate necessity. It would help
nobody if we started to develop solutions for problems that don't exist.
The problem countries will make themselves obvious when then time comes.
Eclecticology
Just following the new logic. Why should our article on the modern state of
Mexico have history in it that doesn't belong to it? The history of the
modern state called Mexico really doesn't start until until 1917 when its
current constitution was drafted (arguably it may have started when it got
its independence from Spain in 1810). So it is only logical that the article
on the modern state should be at [[United States of Mexico]] and the main
article on Mexican art, culture and history would be at [[Mexico]] (the
history would probably start with Cortez since Mexican art and culture is a
blending of Mesoamerican and Spanish art and culture).
I really fail to see much of a difference between China, Mexico, France and
many other nations in this regard.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
WikiKarma Payment. Have you had your Wiki today?
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Hyde_Wollaston (new)