I'm not trying to restart the debate - it went on quite long enough as it was! But what was the consensus on naming wikipedia entries for cities? Did it come out to [[city, country]] or was that shouted down by the masses? The reason I ask is because I'm looking at a couple of entries that might be moved and I don't know whether they should...
Karen AKA Kajikit wrote:
I'm not trying to restart the debate - it went on quite long enough as it was! But what was the consensus on naming wikipedia entries for cities? Did it come out to [[city, country]] or was that shouted down by the masses? The reason I ask is because I'm looking at a couple of entries that might be moved and I don't know whether they should...
See: http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk%3ANaming_conventions_%28city_na...
The basics are at least theoretically resolved.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
I'm not trying to restart the debate - it went on quite long enough as it was! But what was the consensus on naming wikipedia entries for cities? Did it come out to [[city, country]] or was that shouted down by the masses? The reason I ask is because I'm looking at a couple of entries that might be moved and I don't know whether they should...
As far as I can judge it, the following rules seem to have gotten majorities:
* Normal rules on disambiguation apply: When there is no need to disambiguate (that is, if there is no other subject with the same name, nor likely to come into existence soon, or when the city is clearly the most important subject under its title), we use simply [[City]]. * When there is a need to disambiguate, [[City, Country]] is used, unless there is a special case or there is a need to disambiguate within a country. * Special case are at the moment the USA and Canada, using [[City, State]] and [[City, Province]], respectively.
What, as far as I can see, has NOT been decided on yet, is whether American and Canadian cities get their State/Province addition even in absence of any necessity for disambiguation.
Andre Engels
On 2 Sept 2002, Andre Engels wrote:
As far as I can judge it, the following rules seem to have gotten majorities:
- Normal rules on disambiguation apply: When there is no need to disambiguate
(that is, if there is no other subject with the same name, nor likely to come into existence soon, or when the city is clearly the most important subject under its title), we use simply [[City]].
Which, if any, is the ideal form among these examples?
1). [[Madrid]] redirects to [[Madrid, Spain]]. For other uses, see [[Madrid (disambiguation)]]
2). [[Paris, France]] redirects to [[Paris]]. For other uses, see [[Paris (disambiguation)]]
3). [[Athens, Greece]] redirects to [[Athens]]; disambiguation at the bottom of the page. (A note of irony here: Athens, Greece has received a less substantial article than [[Athens, Ohio]]).
Tesla Coil wrote:
Which, if any, is the ideal form among these examples?
1). [[Madrid]] redirects to [[Madrid, Spain]]. For other uses, see [[Madrid (disambiguation)]]
2). [[Paris, France]] redirects to [[Paris]]. For other uses, see [[Paris (disambiguation)]]
3). [[Athens, Greece]] redirects to [[Athens]]; disambiguation at the bottom of the page. (A note of irony here: Athens, Greece has received a less substantial article than [[Athens, Ohio]]).
Number 2 appears to be the standard, although many would still argue for Number 1.
Number 3 appears to have been set up before the recent debate, and should be upgraded. With that article still being quite short it's not a big problem for now. The argument for a disambiguation block at the "top" of the article is that it lets people know right away that they could or should be somewhere else. Eclecticology
Which, if any, is the ideal form among these examples?
1). [[Madrid]] redirects to [[Madrid, Spain]]. For other uses, see [[Madrid (disambiguation)]]
2). [[Paris, France]] redirects to [[Paris]]. For other uses, see [[Paris (disambiguation)]]
3). [[Athens, Greece]] redirects to [[Athens]]; disambiguation at the bottom of the page. (A note of irony here: Athens, Greece has received a less substantial article than [[Athens, Ohio]]).
#1 is outdated, this was how it was done before the policy change. When I see a case like this, I will change it to #2, but such changes have very low priority.
The difference between #2 and #3 has to be decided from case to case. If disambiguation takes little space, #3 is preferred, if it takes much space (because there are many alternatives, or because they take more than a few words to explain), #2 does.
Andre Engels
Andre Engels wrote:
2). [[Paris, France]] redirects to [[Paris]]. For other uses, see [[Paris (disambiguation)]]
3). [[Athens, Greece]] redirects to [[Athens]]; disambiguation at the bottom of the page. (A note of irony here: Athens, Greece has received a less substantial article than [[Athens, Ohio]]).
The difference between #2 and #3 has to be decided from case to case. If disambiguation takes little space, #3 is preferred, if it takes much space (because there are many alternatives, or because they take more than a few words to explain), #2 does.
My approach when dealing with these would be to show all the alternatives if there are at most three. If there are more than three I would use a single entry in the form [[city (disambiguation)]] and sort out the rest of the list there.
Eclecticology
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org