Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (subnational entities)

message: ===if we use brackets===
*can we use it for Venezuela? Miranda (state)?
*how disambiguate if two things have the same name?
**X (municipality of Y (department of Argentina)) - would be consequent
**X (municipality, Y, Chaco)
***imagine municipalities with same name in one of the five (or more) La Paz Departments.
:You bring up an interesting point there, but ultimately moot, I think. Even if two places are named, say, Foo province, if only one has a locale named Houston, then it can be at "Houston, Foo". However, if both the Salvadorian Foo and the Mongolian Foo have a Houston, then yes, the country disambiguator is necessary. However, this is not our major concern. All we should be concerned with at the moment is top level divisions. Also, just because it contains brackets doesn't mean they are required. The article for Atlanta is not located at "Atlantia, Georgia (U.S. state)". --Golbez 05:32, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
::This page is "Naming conventions (subnational entities)" not "Naming conventions (first level subnational entities) "
:::We aren't discussing stuff like US counties here. The first priority is first-level divisions. You can read it any way you like, that's the way I read it. --Golbez 17:01, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
::::You are right we do not discuss US counties. Nonetheless the title is not first-level. If you want we can create  a seperate page for you and those that read things into the title in the same way you do. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:27, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC 

message: *can we use it for Venezuela? Miranda (state)?
*how disambiguate if two things have the same name?
**X (municipality of Y (department of Argentina)) - would be consequent
**X (municipality, Y, Chaco)
***imagine municipalities with same name in one of the five (or more) La Paz Departments.
:You bring up an interesting point there, but ultimately moot, I think. Even if two places are named, say, Foo province, if only one has a locale named Houston, then it can be at "Houston, Foo". However, if both the Salvadorian Foo and the Mongolian Foo have a Houston, then yes, the country disambiguator is necessary. However, this is not our major concern. All we should be concerned with at the moment is top level divisions. Also, just because it contains brackets doesn't mean they are required. The article for Atlanta is not located at "Atlantia, Georgia (U.S. state)". --Golbez 05:32, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
::This page is "Naming conventions (subnational entities)" not "Naming conventions (first level subnational entities) "
:::We aren't discussing stuff like US counties here. The first priority is first-level divisions. You can read it any way you like, that's the way I read it. --Golbez 17:01, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
::::You are right we do not discuss US counties. Nonetheless the title is not first-level. If you want we can create  a seperate page for you and those that read things into the title in the same way you do. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:27, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: if we use brackets

message: Without getting into the specifics of either proposal right now, it appears that we have competing or redundant pages. I'd like to suggest a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions for where to have what conversation. Maurreen (talk) 16:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundant or competing pages

message: I'd just like to share the Indian naming convention we've decided on.
*L1 divisions: States + Union Territories (UT)
*L2 divisions (subdivisions of the above): Divisions (divisions are a cluster of districts; all states may not have divisions)
*L3 divisions: districts. (subdivisions of states/ UTs)
*L4 divisions: talukas or tehsils (subdivisons of districts)
This is what we've decided:
# If a state or UT conflicts with any other location: state gets the exclusive title.
# If a city conflicts with a district or division, city gets the exclusive title.
# If a district or division conflicts with a city: note the following convention for disambiguation eg:
#* Mysore>> Mysore district>> Mysore division. (Note the capitalisation)
Exceptions:
*If a district is ~100% urbanised eg Daman, Dimapur; the article should not be split into city and district articles.
* Mumbai is a metropolis which consists of two districts. In this case Mumbai gets the exclusive title, districts are sorted as Mumbai city district and Mumbai suburban district.
*Chandigarh is a UT, city and district. No sorting required.
* The term Delhi is referred to both the city and the National capital territory. Popular usage dictates that Delhi holds only city information, while the UT details are moved to National capital territory of Delhi.
* The term district may not be used for cases like East Sikkim, where the dist. hq and district do not share the same name.
Any clarifications, comments etc, if needed please direct to my talk. Thanks =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:42, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
:why "Mysore district" and not "Mysore District" or "Mysore (district)"?  Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:08, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian naming convention 

message: To clarify, the goals are reordered (from Preliminary analysis and proposals above) as:
#Principle of least astonishment.
#Ease of linking to and incorporating into wiki syntax. Might be subjective.
#Respect for / primacy of local usage. Moving Lancashire to Lancashire County would earn us a well-deserved lynching. On the other hand, local English usage in some countries is not readily apparent or non-existent. 
#Consistency within a given country, considering an article on a given state, department, province, etc. as a member of a set including all the other states, depts and provinces of that country.
#Standardization across the world, Nigerian states with U.S. states with Mexican states with Venezuelan states. This is important for countries that have entities with same names.
:William Allen Simpson 04:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Goals

message: :COMMENT: I renamed UP -> C to make a more neutral in naming. Everybody can claim usability. This is highly subjective. I made comments in and questions and "wrong"-markers in the proposal. Maybe you can adress these issues. Some are really minor, so I think you can fix them. I made the comments in the texts, because otherwise refering to the various things is dificult. I did not sign all this, because this would make the stuff to long. Of course remove my comments if adressed. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: William Allen Simpson 19:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: multiple folks committe genocid. thanx for your helpless comment. Your understanding of my understandings seems to need improvement. What about that I simple misread/misremebered "usage/usability" ?  I just wanted to tell you why i renamed. so don't make strange assumptions on my english. So if you refer to "usage" - WP is an encyclopedia. It covers worldwide information. We have naming conflicts. Nobody claims that the dab-titles we create are used in daily speech Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal Name

message: (moved here from project page)
QUESTION: near to what? Are links depending on where you link from? If I write an article about Abdullah living in New York but born in Adana how should I link? Is this a near link? a far link?
*Apparently, another English language problem.  Nothing in the definition refers to "near link" or "far link".
:William Allen Simpson 19:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: you wrote All the references to the place will be (are) in other articles saying it's "near" - yes, your english at this point is an english that's not very easy for me. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Short name links

message: *Tobias, please stop editing his proposal. If you wish to make comments, make them outside the text of his proposal, you're altering the meaning and understanding of it. Second of all, I think his examples - like mine - were hypothetical. (Even though Kagoshima-ken kind of translates to Kagoshima Prefecture, and we're in the ENGLISH pedia as you so lovingly point out all the time) Right now, my proposal is used on the bulk of pages here, and what few are left will be negotiated over time. As of late, this hasn't been a high priority with me, but I will start working on it again soon. 
:::Tobias did not alter any meaning, he added comments, to help the author to fix bugs. Tobias did never pointed out anything "lovingly". Don't spread this disinformation. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Nasty editting

message: *I appreciate UP's proposal (it wasn't signed and I'm not about to go history diving, I need to get to work), but I think it relies too much on parentheses. The typical standard on Wiki is to use a comma when dealing with a city; i.e. "Adana, Turkey" or "Adana, Adana". The pipe trick is useful, but aesthetics and logic should not be sacrificed for it. The largest bloc of articles on Wiki is the United States towns - over 30,000 in all, and none use the pipe trick except where necessary for disambiguation. See: Colonie (village), New York, Colonie (town), New York. I also disagree that X and X Term can't exist. Most countries in the world are not like the USA, where the state came first and the city came second. In most areas, the state/province exists because of its central city. Therefore, we have (hypothetically) Basra, and then the Basra Province that is specifically centered on that large city. In this case, X and X Term coexisting seems to make sense, to me at least. --Golbez 15:37, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: William Allen Simpson 23:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: William Allen Simpson 23:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

text: William Allen Simpson 19:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: William Allen Simpson 23:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Scalability

message: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tobias Conradi
Has been posted for 2 days and certified by 2 users.
:William Allen Simpson 13:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC tobias conradi 

message: With the recent pause in vandalism during the RfC evaluation, I've finished the first pass at an actual manual of style page.
:William Allen Simpson 04:14, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: fyi interest. you may whish to enhance your english, because you had a problem with the word Bracket: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Bracket Tobias Conradi (Talk) 06:29, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhat amusing that you would point to a series of definitions (did you read them?) that contradict your comment — and at a time when that page itself was damaged by somebody on 2005 Dec 1 (who also listed parentheses as a synonym) and hasn't been fixed in 2 weeks. William Allen Simpson 12:32, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I read them. You may like to read number 3. I thought you would find it yourself. Sorry for overestimating your capabilities. I can't find any edit on 2005-12-01 there. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:47, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

text: My mistake, that's 2005 Nov 1, 6+ weeks. It's the last edit, was  there really any confusion? William Allen Simpson 15:57, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Since when are reverts vandalism? Maybe you can us enlight here. BTW, I am male as you might guess from my first name. Maybe read Tobias. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:47, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

text: --William Allen Simpson 00:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: It's the default only if you have your preferences set that way. I have no intention of injecting myself into the spat betwee you two, I simply wanted to indicate that Tobias had a point. I have made my proposal and I stand by it, I have no further edits to make. I cannot get involved with admin power because I am involved in the argument, nor do I have any desire to. This is for you two to work out; perhaps a reciprocal RfC should be filed. Maybe you could add your comments without damaging his table, and perhaps he could edit his table without altering your proposal. Good luck. --Golbez 01:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Oh, and PS - From Minor edit, "Reverts to a disputed page are unlikely to be minor. When a page is disputed, and especially if an edit war is brewing or in full eruption -- then it's better not to mark ANY edit as minor: not unless you're sure that all other users will agree it's minor, like correcting a misspelling." This is a disputed page, it wasn't bald vandalism. --Golbez 01:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: @William - Where did I wipe out anything at 2005-12-13 20:47?   thanks. That's the version that was IP edited by Golbez. I revert to this IP-edit version because afterwards you deleted a lot. We can discuss the colors maybe make them little lighter. Furthermore you may read Wikipedia:Vandalism and maybe stop calling my edits vandalism. I filed Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation#Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(subnational_entities) because of all your quite agressive behavior. Maybe cou can alter the RfC to reflect the insights you may gain from this RfM. Why is the bot claim still online? Do you really want that everybody can read this nonsense you wrote and what is more important let all people see that you do not delete these accusations after you were told that "fast edits" are possible without a bot. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal UP text 

message: Hey there, I'm here from the Mediation Cabal and i'm going to start a non-user formatted rfc in a second. Hopefully we can figure things out here. karmafist 17:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, here we go. Put all your concerns at Wikipedia:Request for comment/Naming conventions (subnational entities) I'm putting the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (subnational entities) under protection until this has been solved. karmafist 17:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Have No Fear, the Cabal Is Here!

message: What currently is largely unsolved are municipalities. "X, Subdivision" is used sometimes to refer to a municipality even if a city of that name exists in this region. In Proposal A it would be "X Municipality" or "X Municipality, Subdivision". But I think this is not really nice. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 05:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Municipalities 

message: See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Administrative divisions.
:--William Allen Simpson 04:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I did not find anything at the above link.  Was it moved somewhere else, or declined?  --Elonka 17:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It failed, it got two rejects and was removed for being moribund. They took it as a content dispute, I guess due to William's poor phrasing of the issue. --Golbez 18:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requests for arbitration