Talk:Alternative Faso

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Burkina Faso (assessed as Low-importance).

Politics: Political parties Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

On 13 April 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Le Faso Autrement. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Requested move 13 April 2023

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 10:50, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative Faso → Le Faso Autrement – "Faso Alternative" is a decidedly wrong translation, the most faithful translation of the original name would be "Faso Otherwise". However the first translation is used from a handful of sources (which may have been influenced by Wikipedia) and the second translation is attested by a few sources, so in cases like this it is better to use the uncotroversial original name. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 14:50, 13 April 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 18:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 01:40, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose What matters is what the party's common name is in English language sources, which appears to be the current title (for example, the Danish Social Liberal Party is nothing like the Danish name ("The Radical Left")). Sources used the English name before the Wikipedia article was written, so were not influenced by it (e.g. IPU, IFES). Number 5 7 16:39, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Danish Social Liberal Party" is the is effective established English name of Radikale Venstre (there are other examples of Norwegian parties with different English names from the actual translation), but it has nothing to do with this case, Alternative Faso is used in a handful of sources, so one cannot apply the WP:COMMONNAME principle; furthermore, based on WP:UE: "If there is no established English-language treatment for a name, translate it if this can be done without loss of accuracy and with greater understanding for the English-speaking reader". Alternative Faso is neither an established name nor certainly an accurate translation (which is Faso Otherwise, for which there are also other sources: [1], [2], [3], [4]). If there are sources for both, the more accurate translation (Faso Otherwise) or the original name (Le Faso Autrement) should be used. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:38, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is an established English name for the party, as it is used by organisations like the IPU (who get their information from national parliaments) and IFES. As far as I can see, the current name is more commonly used than "Faso Otherwise" (for example Google Books has four hits for the current title and one for "Faso Otherwise"). Number 5 7 22:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Established name also means that it is used by a clear majority of sources, which is surely not demonstrable in this case. You should know that the Google hits don't matter in cases like this, in reality "Alternative Faso" is used only by two different books and not by four (since there are multiple annual editions of the Political Handbook of the World). Furthermore, the same IFES calls the party in two different ways.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 23:25, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 06:37, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relister comment: No rough consensus found. With minimal participation, I will relist for more consensus. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 01:40, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Page's title

@Number 57 I premise that in cases like this the most neutral title would be the subject's original name, but I would prefer not to start another move request. Instead, can you explain to me the precise reason why you objected to moving the page to Faso Otherwise, which is the most correct attested translation? Scia Della Cometa (talk) 14:57, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated above, because it's the WP:COMMONNAME. Again, English names do not have to be exact translations, they should be whatever the most common English version is. I noted the Danish Social Liberal Party as an example above; another one would be the Conservative Party (Norway), whose Norwegian name is simply "Right", but it is widely known in English as the Conservative Party. This is a fundamental naming concept on Wikipedia. Number 5 7 19:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Number 57 And are you able to prove that Alternative Faso is much more common than Otherwise Faso? Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:00, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; Google Books has a few uses of Alternative Faso and no uses of Otherwise Faso. Similarly, a standard Google search has around a dozen uses of the current title and just two of the proposed (three appear but one is not about the party). Also, this page is on my watchlist, so please don't ping me. Cheers, Number 5 7 20:29, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, while it may be a direct translation "Otherwise Faso" doesn't parse in English; "Alternative" is the 'correct' translation in terms of getting the meaning correct. Number 5 7 20:31, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not even in French does it have a complete meaning, but there are too many sources on the effective translation to be ignored. I think I will start a move request to the real translation, although the name of the article, in cases like this one, should be the original name (unfortunately, the participation in the previous discussion was low). Scia Della Cometa (talk) 17:34, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate your bloody-mindedness means the RM will happen whatever I say, my view is that you are wasting everyone's starting an RM on a proposal clearly in violation of Wikipedia naming policy. There are literally only two sources that use the "Otherwise Faso" version, which (again) is not coherent English. Literally correct translations are not always actually correct translations, because you have to bear in mind that word combinations work differently in different languages. A related example might be Ministry of Defense (Israel) – a literal translation is "Ministry of Security", but "Defense" is how these ministries are more commonly known. Number 5 7 19:18, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]