Talk:Grorud Valley

Article name

The English name "Grorud Valley" (84 hits for "Grorud Valley is") is more common in English sources than "Groruddalen" (79 hits for "Groruddalen is") based on a Google Books search. Doremo (talk) 11:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A google search might seem as a very limited source for deciding how to name a urban district in Norway's capital.

There are so many other different approaches here:

A search at Visit Oslo [1] shows frequent use of Groruddalen or even Groruddalen valley in the english section
In Category:Valleys of Norway there are 120+ pages, only one other of them with valley, the other ones with their proper norwegian names. The other one is Dunderland Valley; which is also the work of Doremo (talk · contribs); despite the efforts from norwegian contributors.
This could for instance be compared to Squaw Valley, which is obviously a valley as such, but is most referred to as an district with distinct features. Not even the germans translate Squaw Valley to Indianische Frau Tal.
Groruddalen (as well as other Norwegian placenames with -dalen og -dal) is most commonly refered to as an administrative entity or sociogeographical area. It is seldom though of as a valley as landscape shape per se. Translation of the suffix might be used for a distancing effect or to make a comic effect.

The evidence both here and in the Dunderland valley case is based on google searches and random book hits. Such searches does not reflect the translation abilities or language capacities of the given "sources", i.e. hits. In my opinion, it would be more interesting to look for translations used in english language books by norwegians presenting Norway for a foreign audience. Here I've selected a sample of norwegian books written in english from National_Library_of_Norway. They say Dunderlandsdalen, Dunderlandsdalen, Dunderlandsdalen, Dunderlandsdal, Groruddalen, Groruddalen, Groruddalen. Bw --Orland (talk) 19:01, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like grasping at straws to avoid the evidence of common usage. Doremo (talk) 02:41, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Doremo: so you really do believe that your method is the best possible the determine ″common usage″? I’m surprised, at best. --Orland (talk) 04:07, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cherry-picking limited sources, as you have done above, is not a good way to determine common usage. Doremo (talk) 04:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing limited about the arguments #1-4 above. You are using a variety of different counterattack defences (grasping at straws and limited sources) rather than discussing the matter in question.
Speaking of limited sources; your 84 versus 79 hits from is also a limited source. Looking at National library of Norway online book service, there are 19 books in a search for Grorud valley, whilst there are 74 books in a search for Grodruddalen in english language books.

@Doremo: Could you please relate and respond to #4 above!? Bw Orland (talk) 07:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The suggested "search at Visit Oslo" or "translations used in english language books by norwegians" is certainly limiting one's scope to cherry-picked sources (and nonnative English at that). Regarding your no. 4, English WP says "The Grorud Valley ... is a broad valley ..." and Norwegian WP says "Groruddalen er et dalstrøk ...". They both immediately and clearly describe it as a valley. Doremo (talk) 10:09, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now you're using Wikipedia as a source, aren't you? Orland (talk) 10:15, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If the WP articles are wrong, then they should be corrected: "The Grorud Valley ... is not a broad valley ..." / "Groruddalen er ikke et dalstrøk ...". Doremo (talk) 11:20, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Groruddalen is of course a valley, but the name is also or primarly the name for an area within Oslo. As a name for the eastern/northeastern suburb the two components have been permanently fused. Groruddalen is the actually name for this area and we should not impose an constructed name like Grorud Valley. --— Erik Jr. 13:33, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the national library I only found a couple of books from the 1960s with the name "Grorud Valley". In Google Scholar there are some 300 hits for "Groruddalen" in English language articles, but only 80 for "Grorud Valley". — Erik Jr. 13:43, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's another reasonable means of comparison; it stands in contrast to the prevalence of "Grorud Valley is" in a Google search. For what it's worth, the ratio of Grorud Valley:Groruddalen is 2:1 at newspapers.com and (near as I can figure) 5:4 in a Google Books search. Doremo (talk) 14:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Google Books hits with the English name are from contemporary works (2012–2018), as are the ones with the endonym (2002–2018). Doremo (talk) 15:05, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think a request to move the article back to the original name is the way to proceed. See also Talk:Gudbrandsdalen. - 4ing (talk) 11:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that the original name of this article (from 2006 to 2019) was "Grorud Valley". Doremo (talk) 12:30, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doremo has cited Made in Norway: New Norwegian Architecture as an evidence for the usage of the name Grorud valley in english texts. Truth is, that in this book (Google books here), the term Grorud Valley is used once, and the term Groruddalen valley is used once. Both on page 120. Thus; this book can not be used as a source for at choice between terms. Orland (talk) 07:59, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's a source for Grorud valley because that name appears in the text. Doremo (talk) 09:38, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 April 2019

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 to move at this time — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grorud Valley → Groruddalen – Groruddalen (as well as many other Norwegian placenames with -dalen og -dal) is most commonly refered to as an administrative entity or sociogeographical area. It is seldom though of as a valley as landscape shape per se. In english texts of norwegian origin, it is by far most common to refer to this area as Groruddalen or even Groruddalen valley. Translation of the suffix might be used for a distancing effect or to make a comic effect. In Category:Valleys of Norway there are 120+ pages, only one other of them with valley, the other ones with their proper norwegian names. Orland (talk) 15:45, 25 April 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. bd2412 T 13:10, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:ENGLISH. As discussed above, Grorud Valley is more common than Groruddalen in a general Google search, in a Google Books search, and in a newspapers.com search. In addition to being more common, it is also a better English form than the endonym Groruddalen. Doremo (talk) 16:15, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Groruddalen is a proper noun that can not be decomposed and translated at will. This is the actual name for this area within Oslo. Groruddalen is notably more common than Grorud Valley in scholarly sources (per Google Scholar) and in the National Library of Norway. This kind of Norwegian place name is consistently listed in this way in English WP. --— Erik Jr. 17:14, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This article may be discussing two separate topics: 1) The Grorud Valley, a physical geographical feature, which appears to have been the original contributor's intent, and 2) a suburb (i.e., settlement) named Groruddalen, which is a populated place in Oslo. If so, it would make good sense to create a separate article called Groruddalen for that populated place. Doremo (talk) 09:49, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Nah. The first version of this article describes a urban area/suburb/settlement with motorways, urbanization, population, and administrative borders. We can't make dulicate articles about every inhabited valley in Norway. Bw Orland (talk) 10:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- The original article is rather geophysical ("The Grorud Valley ... is a broad valley ... on the valleysides ... in the valley basin ... In the south of the valley ... The central valley is ... across the valley") while necessarily discussing settlement as well. Doremo (talk) 10:58, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Groruddalen is the name that should be used, seems clear from the statements of both Orland and Erik Jr.. Ulflarsen (talk) 16:42, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, chiming in here as the author who chose the title 13 years ago. Either name is acceptable. "Groruddalen" is probably used slightly more often, even in English, but "Grorud Valley" has been used in official contexts as well (e.g. [2]). USEENGLISH probably supports "Grorud Valley", COMMONNAME supports "Groruddalen". In either case, there should be a redirect from the other title. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:53, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Consistency is also a point. Maridalen, Sørkedalen and other valleys are not listed with translated names. — Erik Jr. 08:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Stating the obvious. (Uncertain about whether or not the initiator should give his opition in a bulletpoint as well). Orland (talk) 08:59, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- No, you shouldn't, Orland. See Wikipedia:Requested moves#Commenting in a requested move: Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line. But no great harm done, it just makes it a (very) little more work for the closer. Andrewa (talk) 12:38, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This should not be a discussion. 3s (talk) 07:31, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:USEENGLISH. Rreagan007 (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.