Talk:Arête

message: Is Arete or Arête the correct spelling for this landform? --Gabriel Beecham/Kwekubo 00:17, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't trust Google with any questions involving accented words! Arête is AFAIK the correct spelling in English, though the unaccented form is inevitably a common variant and not surprisingly the dominant form on web pages. I think this page should be moved to Arête, which has the further advantage that the suffix "(landform)" isn't needed to distinguish it from a Greek word. --Blisco 21:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm arriving late in this discussion, but the move would be supported by the Glossary of Geology (written in English), which uses the word with the circumflex, and while most geologists often use the word sloppily without, my feeling is that in formal writing the circumflex is used more often.  Cheers Geologyguy 17:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Move. Duja 08:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Use the Latin alphabet" means don't use e.g. Greek or Arabic letters or Chinese characters; letters with diacritics such as ê are just as much part of the Latin alphabet as e is. And arête is an English word: it's spelt that way by Bartleby and, I suspect, any dictionary you care to consult (though I can't verify that at the moment); it's also on Wikipedia's own List of English words with diacritics. So any references in articles should be spelt that way anyway, and therefore linking needn't be an issue. Moreover, anyone typing "arete" into the search box is already taken to a disambiguation page, so it makes little difference what the next link they click on is called. The actual Wikipedia guidelines on cases like this are the bottom of the page you cited (under Disputed issues), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (precision), and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics). Admittedly the issue is not at all clear-cut, but it seems that the existence of different meanings with or without diacritics can be a factor in deciding whether or not to use them. --Blisco 11:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree the subject is a bit hazy but I think this does fall into the Disputed issues section of WP:NC(UE) which had a small majority of votes in favor is using diacritics. Because it was a majority but not a concensus I'm willing to discard it all together, but ignoring conventions I agree with Blisco. Vicarious 06:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
* Oppose. Moving to Arête would contradict WP guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) hike395 05:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: ====(use English)====
The "use English" guideline directs us to specifically use Latin-only titles for WP articles. This is sensible, because for searching and linking, that is what people can easily type at their keyboard with no special keystrokes. I don't think we should overturn this guideline to avoid disambiguation hike395 05:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Use the Latin alphabet" means don't use e.g. Greek or Arabic letters or Chinese characters; letters with diacritics such as ê are just as much part of the Latin alphabet as e is. And arête is an English word: it's spelt that way by Bartleby and, I suspect, any dictionary you care to consult (though I can't verify that at the moment); it's also on Wikipedia's own List of English words with diacritics. So any references in articles should be spelt that way anyway, and therefore linking needn't be an issue. Moreover, anyone typing "arete" into the search box is already taken to a disambiguation page, so it makes little difference what the next link they click on is called. The actual Wikipedia guidelines on cases like this are the bottom of the page you cited (under Disputed issues), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (precision), and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics). Admittedly the issue is not at all clear-cut, but it seems that the existence of different meanings with or without diacritics can be a factor in deciding whether or not to use them. --Blisco 11:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree the subject is a bit hazy but I think this does fall into the Disputed issues section of WP:NC(UE) which had a small majority of votes in favor is using diacritics. Because it was a majority but not a concensus I'm willing to discard it all together, but ignoring conventions I agree with Blisco. Vicarious 06:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: The "use English" guideline directs us to specifically use Latin-only titles for WP articles. This is sensible, because for searching and linking, that is what people can easily type at their keyboard with no special keystrokes. I don't think we should overturn this guideline to avoid disambiguation hike395 05:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Use the Latin alphabet" means don't use e.g. Greek or Arabic letters or Chinese characters; letters with diacritics such as ê are just as much part of the Latin alphabet as e is. And arête is an English word: it's spelt that way by Bartleby and, I suspect, any dictionary you care to consult (though I can't verify that at the moment); it's also on Wikipedia's own List of English words with diacritics. So any references in articles should be spelt that way anyway, and therefore linking needn't be an issue. Moreover, anyone typing "arete" into the search box is already taken to a disambiguation page, so it makes little difference what the next link they click on is called. The actual Wikipedia guidelines on cases like this are the bottom of the page you cited (under Disputed issues), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (precision), and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics). Admittedly the issue is not at all clear-cut, but it seems that the existence of different meanings with or without diacritics can be a factor in deciding whether or not to use them. --Blisco 11:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree the subject is a bit hazy but I think this does fall into the Disputed issues section of WP:NC(UE) which had a small majority of votes in favor is using diacritics. Because it was a majority but not a concensus I'm willing to discard it all together, but ignoring conventions I agree with Blisco. Vicarious 06:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: (use English)

message: I don't think the picture below is an arete but the sides of a glacial trough. Striding edge is a more usual example SuzanneKn (talk) 09:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is assuredly an arete. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 14:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Where there are two glacial troughs running next to each other, there's often an arête on the ridge in between. Mikenorton (talk) 00:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo query

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Arête. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080106103343/http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/lemke/alpine_glacial_glossary/landforms/arete.html to http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/lemke/alpine_glacial_glossary/landforms/arete.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:43, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)