Talk:Halve Maen

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Halve Maen article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Ships C‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

New York (state): Capital District / Hudson Valley

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Capital District (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Hudson Valley (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

Come on, seriously?! Halve Maen? Wikipedia guidelines I believe encourage the naming of articles after the most common name. The ship is known in English as the Half Moon. The current official replica of the ship is called the Half Moon. The weathervane in the picture is called Half Moon, not the weathervane of the Halve Maen. Use this title for the Dutch version, but this is the English version of wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.182.142.254 (talk) 07:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)- "Use the most commonly used English version of the name of the subject as the title of the article, as you would find it in verifiable reliable sources (for example other encyclopedias and reference works). This makes it easy to find, and easy to compare information with other sources." No one looking up the Half Moon would think to type Halve Maen. I will be looking into moving this article to Half Moon (ship) or whatever is more convenient available name.Camelbinky (talk) 00:07, 12 December 2008 (UTC) (Comments actually by User:VanishedUser 23asdsalkaka))‎[reply]

Untitled

Apologies to Albany, NY civic boosters aside, the true Largest Working Weathervane in North America is at the airport in Whitehorse, YT, Canada. It is the hulk of an actual DC-3 airplane placed on a pivot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:447:C000:DB08:B8B5:4B59:BB1B:467F (talk) 21:22, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not a potential EASTERN route to China

I cannot believe that the very capable sea-faring Dutch would be looking for an eastern route to China in the vicinity of New York. Surely they were looking for a western route. --ChrisJBenson (talk) 03:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was commissioned to find an eastern route, and then changed plan.--MWAK (talk) 07:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Commissioned to find an eastern route to Asia? In the 1600's? It was far too late for that by then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.240.50.204 (talk) 22:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern route north around Norway and through the Arctic. Which it was not too late, but instead too early. They needed to wait for some global warming!Camelbinky (talk) 18:31, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Naming Conventions, Shmaming Conventions!

Agree re Half Moon. This ship is famous mainly in the U.S., where it is exclusively known by its English name. The Half Moon is an icon of national legend in the U.S., where no one's ever heard of the Halve Maen. Get real!

Nothing against the Dutch. But change it!

Dank u wel. Sca (talk) 13:34, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NoCamelbinky (talk) 18:31, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with this as well as above. Hudson "Half Moon" gets 44,900 book results. Hudson "Halve Maen" gets 4,320 book results (with quite a bit of overlap re: they call it the "Half Moon" but mention at some point its Dutch name, the "Halve Maen". Looks like overwhelming WP:ENGLISH for "Half Moon"). Looks like complete consensus here so filling out WP:RM. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 16:10, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Besides @24.182.142.254: and @Sca:, noted this article was in fact moved by @RegentsPark: diff for "Common English name". It was moved back two years later by @Docu: for, well, no valid reason I can see. Missed a con-comment by @VanishedUser 23asdsalkaka: or @Camelbinky:?, hard to tell, maybe a technical result of WP:VANISH?. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:39, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 January 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. I recommend opening this as a more normal RM discussion, as the history, evidence, and format here are very confusing, and not inviting of more comments. Finally, the policy vs guideline argument is not persuasive, since policy does not say we have to use the most common name. (non-admin closure) Dicklyon (talk) 03:34, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Halve Maen → Half Moon (ship) – Total consensus to move to WP:ENGLISH name and "Half Moon" is 10 to 1 the common name here by reference (see Talk:Halve Maen). Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 16:15, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:34, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fountains of Bryn Mawr: But what was the ship called officially in the port where it was registered? What name was painted on its bows or stern or wherever? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:34, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How can there be "total consensus" before the move was requested? The artile Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships) does not discuss translating ship names, so a better argument needs to be made here. – Editør (talk) 10:04, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Editør: @Anthony Appleyard:, The "request" was for an uncontested move needing a technical fix, since been moved to "contested". The total consensus I speak of is on the talk page. This has been questioned since December 2008, 4 editors have all said move to "Half Moon", no counter arguments. Also Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships) says "Civilian ship articles should follow standard Wikipedia naming conventions" (link to Wikipedia:Article titles)----> Wikipedia:Article titles#English-language titles "On the English Wikipedia, article titles are written using the English language." and WP:MOSAT---> Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) "most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources (for example other encyclopedias and reference works, scholarly journals and major news sources)" ---> Encyclopædia Britannica - Half Moon, Encyclopedia of Exploration to 1800 (page 524) - Half Moon, Half Moon: Henry Hudson and the Voyage that Redrew the Map of the New World, The New York Times, "Dutch Royalty Appears, but Not to Reclaim the Island" - Half Moon, CBS Sunday Morning, "Almanac: Henry Hudson" - Half Moon. Guidelines seem pretty clear and the move looked uncontested. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the article name as is. Ira Goldstein (talk) 04:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
move and comment - WP:COMMONNAME should also be followed here, Google Scholar [1][2], Google Books [3], [4]. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:27, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this conflicts with the natural disambiguation option at WP:NCDAB. --HyperGaruda (talk) 11:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NCDAB guideline gives 3 options and this is consistent with the WP:NCDAB #2 Further linked WP:ATDAB policy says Natural disambiguation should use "an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English reliable sources", and that we should follow WP:CRITERIA "Article titles are based on how reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject. Do not, however, use obscure or made-up names." "Half Moon" is used 10 to 1 in sources and over half of the first 20 "Halve Maen" hits explain this is the ship by the English name Half Moon (2 simple call it the Half Moon). That sounds pretty "obscure". Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 19:19, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually hinting at the line Natural disambiguation is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation. --HyperGaruda (talk) 19:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Noted there were three options (above), including that one. WP:NCDAB #1 presupposes commonly used in English (which "Halve Maen" is not), gives three remedies, and its a guideline. Policy WP:COMMONNAME says the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred. Following policy and applying the best fit in a guideline is the obvious way to go re: WP:COMMONNAME, WP:NCDAB #2. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:03, 3 February 2017 (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.