nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
13,818
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 206:
Line 206: + + + + +
Conservapedia talk:Editing article and talk pages (view source)
Revision as of 07:39, April 22, 2008
, 07:39, April 22, 2008→City/town/county names as article titles?
::: Good suggestions, Jinkas. Unless another Sysop objects, I like your proposed standard.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:31, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
::: Good suggestions, Jinkas. Unless another Sysop objects, I like your proposed standard.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:31, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
:::: Oh, I wish people would stop think just in U.S. terms! First, I'd go for "City, State", not "City, ST", as (a) (many?) other countries don't have two-letter codes for their states, so that format would not be universally applicable, and (b) the American state codes would not be as familiar to non-Americans as the names of the states. Second, and this is more of a query than an objection or proposal, what about countries without states? Do we say "Newcastle, England" ("City, Country") and "Newcastle, New South Wales" ("City, State") or "Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia" ("City, State, Country"), or what? It's probably okay to have "City, State" where there are states and "City, Country" where there are no states, but I'd be interested in other views on this. Then of course there are places with provinces or etc. instead of states, but I guess we simply treat them in the same manner as states. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 03:07, 22 April 2008 (EDT)
:::: Oh, I wish people would stop think just in U.S. terms! First, I'd go for "City, State", not "City, ST", as (a) (many?) other countries don't have two-letter codes for their states, so that format would not be universally applicable, and (b) the American state codes would not be as familiar to non-Americans as the names of the states. Second, and this is more of a query than an objection or proposal, what about countries without states? Do we say "Newcastle, England" ("City, Country") and "Newcastle, New South Wales" ("City, State") or "Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia" ("City, State, Country"), or what? It's probably okay to have "City, State" where there are states and "City, Country" where there are no states, but I'd be interested in other views on this. Then of course there are places with provinces or etc. instead of states, but I guess we simply treat them in the same manner as states. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 03:07, 22 April 2008 (EDT)
::: Personally, I'm not sure this is needed at this time. I go with the thought that the fewer rules we apply, unless obviously necessary, the better. The fewer rules that there are and the easier that we make it to edit, the more likely people are to want to create articles, or to edit those that already exist. Many cities are known by their names alone: "Las Vegas", "Los Angeles", "Boston", etc. I think there should be some amount of discretion left to the article creator. In the event that a city, ST naming convention is adopted (or city, state) then please also make sure that the city names alone are created as redirects. An article on Nevada may make mention of famous cities such as "Las Vegas", "Reno", etc. We don't want the Nevada article to say "Las Vegas, NV", "Reno, NV". (Note: I am aware the editor can put "Las Vegas, NV|Las Vegas" but again we are adding extra levels of complexity, and the greater the level of complexity, the less likely the rule is to be properly followed.
::: These are my thoughts, but I don't wish to have this classified as an "objection". If there is a concensus that city naming convention should be adopted, then I don't want to impede that view.
::: Thanks [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:39, 22 April 2008 (EDT)