Talk:Sadarak (town)

On 16 March 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved from Sədərək to Sadarak (town). The result of the discussion was moved.

Tag

The only references for this article are absurdly biased officially sanctioned Azeri state sources. Come up with better or the content will be removed. Mr A (talk) 22:39, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 March 2021

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: moved. The moving arguments seem to be more well-supported by policy. (closed by non-admin page mover) ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 16:33, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sədərək → Sadarak (town) – Move to "Sadarak (town)" per WP:UE/WP:COMMONNAME/WP:ENGLISH. Added (town) to avoid confusion with Sadarak District. Proof of anglicized name being the common name:

Results from Google News: Sadarak: 251 Sədərək: 1

Results from Google Scholar: Sadarak: 133 Sədərək: 15

Individual reliable sources referring to the city as Sadarak: New York Times, Anadolu Agency, OC Media

This is the same name but an anglicized version. Unlike other small villages, this is a fairly large town and an administrative centre, which has made a lot of appearances in English-language media, in most of which, "Sadarak" has been used much more, establishing its WP:COMMONNAME. I'd also like to ask the closing admin to give more attention to the arguments being made rather than the vote counts, as there are people who go over to each RM and repeat unrelated policies as an "Oppose" argument. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 13:19, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. The current title is untypeable and unpronounceable by the vast majority of English speakers. Station1 (talk) 04:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As if the vast majority of English speakers are going to be looking for such an obscure place. Those that do will probably know how to pronounce ə. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, another one Firstly Sədərək (town) or Sədərək (village) as first line of article. Secondly a small settlement of 7,260 people does not have an "English name". This is the name in full font English books, same every one of the 1000 plus Azerbaijan geo stubs which our well-meaning editor seems to intend to move 1 by 1 through RMs. But in order to add it to list of English exonyms we need the same burden of proof as for Munich. Not simply say look here's a load of websites and sources printed without full fonts, and don't look at books by Dorling Kindersley and Lonely Planet which do have full fonts (like en.Wikipedia has full fonts for all geos). In ictu oculi (talk) 13:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed my proposal to "(town)". You should spend more time looking at more recent sources (per WP:MODERNPLACENAME) rather than a Kindersley book from 2004 and Lonely Planet, which isn't a WP:RS, from 5 years earlier. 251 recent Google News and 133 Scholarly books/articles would disagree with you on what is the current English common name. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 14:11, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per OP and Station1. Gnominite (talk) 19:20, 21 March 2021 (UTC) CU-confirmed sock, please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CuriousGolden --Blablubbs|talk 16:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:DIACRITICS.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:39, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the user above has copy-pasted the same comment mentioning a completely irrelevant policy to every single Requested Moves of mine.

The first sentence from that policy:

The use of modified letters (such as accents or other diacritics) in article titles is neither encouraged nor discouraged; when deciding between versions of a word which differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language (including other encyclopedias and reference works). The policy on using common names and on foreign names does not prohibit the use of modified letters, if they are used in the common name as verified by reliable sources.

See above to know which name English language reliable sources use. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 20:48, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. All titles should use letters from the English alphabet. Red Slash 17:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC) It's also clear that this is the Common Name in English. Red Slash 17:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per In Ictu Oculi. No such user (talk) 12:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Nom seems correct about the form predominately used in English language sources, so COMMONNAME should prevail. SnowFire (talk) 19:10, 16 April 2021 (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.