<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1276" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=MailContainerBody
style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; TEXT-DECORATION: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none"
leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 acc_role="text" CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area"><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" />
<DIV>About this time last year, I remember a lot of people arguing with me that
we must use the most common terminology when naming a page; has this convention
changed? Wik continues to revert my move of [[extermination camp]] to [[death
camp]] -- is there any usage of "death camp" which does not directly, or
indirectly, refer to the death camps of World War II? Google finds 6 times
as many death camp articles -- surely that makes it clear which is more common?!
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Some would be mediators are trying to "compromise" by turning [[death
camp]] into a disambiguation where they note, "Some people call prisons with
execution chambers, as death camps" -- does not that very statement make it
clear that "death camp" is the most common usage. -- In any case, while "death
camp" is used to refer to non-death camps (such as the prison at Guantanamo) --
its really very clear that such comparisons are deragatory and not to be taken
literally. Furthermore, such comparisons are not expressed, "Guantanamo is an
extermination camp!"; I think its very clear that death camp is the most common
name. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have asked repeatedly how to get my messages to display properly in the
mailing list, please inform me. </DIV></BODY></HTML>