Jump to content

Talk:Futiga, American Samoa

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Futiga)

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Amouli which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 August 2020

[edit]
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 move. It's clear there's no agreement that the advice of WP:USPLACE on the preemptive "comma convention" be followed for unambiguous communities in American Samoa. Specifically, of territories, USPLACE says only that "most [place names] in U.S. territories are titled Placename, Territory" with no further guidance, not that the comma convention should or must be used. Compelling evidence showed that both local and international news sources do use the comma convention, but it was also argued that this may not reflect local use. Additionally, as was shown, the comma convention is widely used by media in cases where Wikipedia does not use it, as with Lisbon, Portugal. Finally, I note that the 2016 RM also resulted in a consensus not to move - while consensus can change, this RM shows that it hasn't in this case. It may take a wider discussion to resolve this issue. On another note, given the result of that RM, all the places that have recently been moved without discussion should be restored. Cúchullain t/c 15:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

– the convention on naming US cities states that city names should be suffixed by ,statename (or in this case, the name of the territory, American Samoa) I-82-I | TALK 10:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This seems to have been rejected at Talk:Amouli, American Samoa#Requested move 12 November 2016, has something changed? If not the other moves should be reverted, none of these seem to be ambiguous. See also this diff for the previous decline though I don't object to the 3rd (Sili) where its a change from bracket to comma disambiguation. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – does USPLACE apply to U.S. territories or just U.S. states? cookie monster (2020) 755 02:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    If the USPLACE guideline is for places in the US, then that would include American Samoa because it's part of the US. (Not every part of the country is organized as a state.) ╠╣uw [talk] 10:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:USPLACE. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Does this apply to the American Samoa though? USPLACE says "most in U.S. territories are titled Placename, Territory" but does the preemptive disambiguation rule apply here? Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:06, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'm also wondering if the usual convention for titling US place names should apply here. I take it that in many ways American Samoa exists outside of the cultural and discourse practices of the mainland, so the extension of WP:USPLACE should not be taken for granted. At least it should give us pause that almost all of the articles on places in American Samoa have been at the base titles since their creation, which was typically around a decade ago (that's what I see from the dozen or so articles I've looked at: the ones that are at the disambiguated titles are there because the base title is ambiguous (like for Tula, American Samoa), with Poloa, American Samoa and Tafuna, American Samoa the two exception I could find; at this moment, almost all articles are at the longer title, but that's only because they were moved en masse two days ago). There seems to be long-standing tacit consensus for the base titles, and we need good arguments to overturn it.
    The comments in the previous RM are also quite informative: see in particular CMD's observation that unlike on the mainland, the comma-separated suffic is not part of the official names, and Mhockey's comment to the effect that this usage is not familiar to people on the islands. – Uanfala (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    If this is closed as not moved or no consensus the others should be moved back as undiscussed moves. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pinging participants in the previous RM: Huwmanbeing, Pppery, Timrollpickering, Imzadi1979, Chipmunkdavis, Mhockey, Necrothesp, Dicklyon, and Neodop. – Uanfala (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2020 (UTC) [reply]
  • Oppose. Completely unnecessary. American Samoa is not a state, so even if we must follow the City, State convention for cities within the actual United States (and personally I think that's completely unnecessary too) there's absolutely no need to follow it for territories. -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:27, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Adding the territory name is preferable for a few reasons, but WP:CONSISTENT/WP:TITLECON are probably the most significant. Nearly all the 40,000+ articles on populated places in the US are currently titled according to the USPLACE convention (which we retain for a variety of reasons). More specifically for this case, the great majority of the 400+ populated places in US territories are also currently titled according to the USPLACE convention (see Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, Guam). Unless there's a compelling reason why we should treat American Samoa differently than the overwhelming majority of places in other territories and states, it's best to apply the convention consistently.

    It may also be helpful to note that the AP Stylebook, which USPLACE taps as a reliable source for titling norms, states that the territory name should be included, and does so in its articles.[1][2] Other agencies seemingly follow suit, from large ones like Reuters[3][4] to local news sites.[5] ╠╣uw [talk] 10:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • The AP seems to append the state or country name after the first mention of most places because its readers wouldn't otherwise recognise their locations. It seems do so on a much larger scale as well: see examples of "Lisbon, Portugal" [6], "Minsk, Belarus" [7], or "Chennai, India" [8]. We may follow that practice when mentioning places in article text, but we don't necessarily use that format when choosing the article titles: the corresponding city articles are at Lisbon, Minsk and Chennai. – Uanfala (talk) 19:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, Wikipedia generally does not append country names. It does, however, append state/territory names to US place articles, in part because that's the common usage, and one reliable indicator of that is major news agencies like the AP, Reuters, UPI[9][10], etc. ╠╣uw [talk] 13:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • The UPI source doesn't append the territory as part of the name, it describes the location as the "island of Ta'u in American Samoa" and then "Ta'u" by itself afterwards. CMD (talk) 14:22, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • United Press definitely does append the territory. Their articles begin:
              "TA'U, American Samoa, Nov. 22 (UPI) -- Self-sufficiency isn't easy on small Pacific islands..."
              "PAGO PAGO, American Samoa, Dec. 30 (UPI) -- As NOAA's GOES-West satellite orbited..."
Associated Press articles do the same:
  "PAGO PAGO, American Samoa (AP) — A North Korean cargo ship seized by the U.S..."[11]
Reuters articles also do the same:
  "PAGO PAGO, American Samoa (Reuters) - U.S. Vice President Mike Pence has..."[12]
As do those from local providers like Samoa News, both in English...
  "Pago Pago, AMERICAN SAMOA — U.S. soldiers appearing in uniform..."[13]
...and in Samoan:
  "Pago Pago, AMERIKA SAMOA   O le ali’i lea o loo nofovaavaaia..."[14]
It's also used outside of datelines[15][16], and while one can certainly find instances of AS placenames without the territory attached, it's usually in cases where the geographic context has already been established. Further, the convention is commonly used by a host of other reliable sources connected to the territory like the National Park Service[17][18], the FAA[19][20], NOAA[21][22], and numerous others both governmental and commercial. In short, appending the territory is indeed common usage.
That being the case, it seems best for the American Samoa articles in question to follow suit, given that we already apply this convention to the overwhelming majority of the other ~40k populated place articles in the US (both state and territory). I’m not saying we can’t exempt these few if there’s some compelling reason to do so, just that in the absence of a compelling reason it’s probably best to stay consistent with the existing title convention and with reliable sources & common use. ╠╣uw [talk] 14:58, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The datelines aren't giving the name of one location, but of two locations (usually city+country although this varies). Presumably that's why in many of those cases one of the two is in all caps. If by convention you're referring to the use of a polity larger than a city in datelines, that's a geographic reference not part of a name, and is used for almost everywhere when writing about a foreign polity. CMD (talk) 15:24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As noted, the usage is common well beyond news media.[23][24][25][26][27][28] Again, I feel it's best to keep consistent with the normal American usage, with reliable sources, with our longstanding convention, and with nearly all similar articles. ╠╣uw [talk] 22:39, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The first source there has a whole paragraph naming villages, "Whereas the villages of Fagamalo, Poloa, Amanave, Fai’lolo, Nua, Se’etaga, Afao, Asili, Amaluia, Leone, Fagasa, Fagatogo, Pago Pago, Aua, Afono, Vatia, Masefau, Faga’itua, Pagai, Utusia, Alofau, Auto, Alao, and Tula in American Samoa were devastated by the disaster..." That's quite a clear indication American Samoa isn't part of the name of these villages. CMD (talk) 10:57, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Again: once the context is set, abbreviation is normal — just as one might say simply "Springfield" once it's established that the context is Missouri.[29] But before truncating, one must first establish the context, which the sources do on first reference by using Placename, Territory. ╠╣uw [talk] 11:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article establishes the context in the first words: "Pago Pago, American Samoa". (The places are all in that area.)
Also, there are many examples of Samoan News using the form in text, even after the AS context has been established in the lead: Fagatogo, American Samoa, Malaeimi, American Samoa, Vaitogi, American Samoa, etc. ╠╣uw [talk] 11:53, 23 August 2020 (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.

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Amouli which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:22, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wider move discussion

[edit]

The convention for municipalities in all U.S. territories is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Should WP:USPLACE apply to US territories?. -- Beland (talk) 00:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Futiga,_American_Samoa&oldid=1225542403"