Talk:Guantánamo

message: Some people seem to have difficulties with reality!
: :) Well, looking at your edits to Siegerjustiz, I would say you have an anti-American slant. I honestly could care less about your ideologies, but Wikipedia has an NPOV for its articles. -- Notheruser 06:41, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: *Guantanamo, Cuba → Guantánamo, Cuba  The accent is part of the correct spelling.  —wwoods 18:51, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and sign your vote with ~~~~,
*Object. common usage -- Philip Baird Shearer 09:09, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Additional comments:
* I don't think the city gets referred to often enough for any usage to be called common. Of the top 50 pages Google found for "guantanamo -bay -base -XP -naval", only three were about the city; "common usage" would make Guantanamo a redirect to Guantanamo Bay. —wwoods 18:48, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: That was a typo on my part, which I corrected above. Jonathunder 18:43, 2005 Mar 25 (UTC)
===Decision/American Naval Base===
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. violet/riga (t) 11:43, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. violet/riga (t) 11:43, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Decision/American Naval Base

message: When I was in Cuba arround year 1999 I was told about this little piece of US in CUBA.
Of course most american will never hear the story because they are not authorised to go in CUBA, only american cars from the 50's are.
The story was that Guantanamo military base was given for 100 years to the american at the Cuban independance.
At the time I noticed that very soon that place should return to Cuban.
It was a surprise for me to learn after Iraq that the US was still having a base there.
Anybody with more knowledge on the real history and the secret deal that make this base still exist should update the page.
: The article about the naval base is at Guantanamo Bay.
:—wwoods 17:06, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article about the naval base is titled Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. It includes a little about the lease, and a link to more. There is no expiration date stated in the lease. The Treaty of 1934 says the base will continue unless abandoned, assuming that the lease is not abrogated or breached. ( Martin |  talk • contribs  22:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Guantanamo 

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and sign your vote with ~~~~,
* Support as proponent. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 14:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Comment  This article move is primarily for the city in Cuba, not other interpretations: most atlases and compendiums – like the US CIA World Factbook entry for Cuba w/map, National Geographic (map of Cuba), Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary, and Encyclopædia Britannica – clearly render (and distinguish) the city with an accent.  Once moved, common use would be reflected with the redirect to Guantanamo (disambiguation) without the accent. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 23:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics) has been debated numerous times and is not policy. Diacritics may be used with appropriate caveats. In this case the need for disambiguation trumps Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), as I see it. It is arguable whether Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) applies to the mere use of diacritics. --Dhartung | Talk 04:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote

message: :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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: no consensus. Decent arguments put forward on both sides and clearly no consensus either way. However, there does appear to be agreement that the target of Guantanamo should be changed. It might be worth trying to move the DAB page to that title.  Number 57 14:09, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 10 July 2020