Talk:Sankt Pölten

	Austria portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Austria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles about Austria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.AustriaWikipedia:WikiProject AustriaTemplate:WikiProject AustriaAustria articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus' to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

– Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC) The suggested form is the more common one, as used on the websites of both the town (German English) and the District (German), and in railway timetables, on station signs, and in German Wikipedia and commons. Also, the word "Sankt" is a German word, not an English one, and therefore "Sankt Pölten-Land District" is Denglish. On the other hand, "St." is an accepted abbreviation for both "Sankt" and its English equivalent ("Saint"), and therefore appropriate for both languages. Bahnfrend (talk) 10:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support per the clear and sensible nomination. Jenks24 (talk) 08:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Pretty much every other German and Austrian settlement with a similar name is named as "Sankt Foo" on Wikipedia. There's no need to make an exception for this one. Proper names do not have to be (and should not be) translated, so the nominator's second point is irrelevant. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Necrothesp. - Darwinek (talk) 20:50, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support There is a reason to make an exception, if sources do, as the proposer seems to show. Wiki-reality does not trump actual reality. Erudy (talk) 12:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Then a general renaming should be proposed, as I'm sure this equally applies to every other place in Germany and Austria beginning with "Sankt". It shouldn't be piecemeal, which just breeds inconsistency. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Necrothesp. In any case, is the proposed title particularly helpful for the reader, who is left wondering whether the name is pronounced Saint Pölten, Sankt Pölten, San Pölten, Sind Pölten or even Sveti Pölten? The sources do not show that the name is customarily translated into St. Pölten: they show that in Austria the name is customarily abbreviated, but then everyone in Austria knows that St. is a shortened form of Sankt. Skinsmoke (talk) 19:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived 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. EdJohnston (talk) 16:50, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sankt Pölten → St. Pölten – St. Pölten is the official Name for the town. See ie

town charter
Lower Austria state constitution (section 5, 1: 'Capital of Lower Austria is the city of St. Pölten.')
Austrian statistical Institute
Austrian central institute for meteorology and geodynamics
city homepage
city limit sign
~~Motorway signpost~~
More avialable if wished Relisted. BDD (talk) 18:03, 16 October 2013 (UTC) --AleXXw (talk) 04:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think roadsigns are a good source for this sort of thing. Shall we rename L'pool or M'cr? bobrayner (talk) 17:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In Austria it's (at least) unusual to shorten roadsigns, but good point ;) Argument stroked. --AleXXw (talk) 18:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as per the discussion above. Nothing has changed. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Since there is no naming guideline for Austria I may quote the german one: "The 2 main rules are: "Use English" and "Use the original if there is no established English usage"." (link). There is no english name.
- There are other municipalities in the german language area named "St." here on enwiki, ie: St. Johann (Reutlingen), St. Moritz, St. Gallen, St. Vith, St. Valentin, St. Gilgen, St. Johann in Tirol, St. Wolfgang im Salzkammergut, not speaking of the rest of the world (St. Louis et al)
- I'm quite surprised you are in the opinion that the state constitution of my home is not worth to be used as quote for wp... --AleXXw (talk) 05:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- One more: even in the Category:Sankt Pölten there are four names with "St. ", but only two (inkluding the main article) with "Sankt". --AleXXw (talk) 05:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not opposed to the renaming per se, but I am opposed to renaming this one town when most others are named in full. I'm sure these arguments apply just as much to every other German, Austrian or Swiss town with "Sankt" in the name and we should go for consistency. There needs to be a general renaming proposal, not a piecemeal one. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I love consistency, but in this case there is a problem: St. and Sankt are used side by side. Even one village can be a Sankt, the village next to it is a St., it is no regional aspect if a place is called one of the both. As an example a random law text. So, consistency, in this case, would go against reality. --AleXXw (talk) 15:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I have to say that on my visits to Austria and Germany I've rarely seen a town or village call itself "Sankt". "St" seems to be pretty standard. So we probably should move all or most. But together, not one at a time. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    True, more municipialities are called "St.", but not all. If we'd move all it would be less wrong, but not all right. But at least for St. Pölten is clear: Wikipedia is the only big thing that calls it Sankt ;) --AleXXw (talk) 18:25, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support as most logical article title name. More concise, just as recognizable if not more, and just as precise. Red Slash 22:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't see why not. "St." is used to abbreviate "Saint" in German and English, so it's a sort of WP:COMMONALITY. I agree with Necrothesp that consistency is desirable, but there's no reason not to move this one and the proceed with others. --BDD (talk) 18:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. "St." is an abbreviation, and the use of abbreviations, like jargon, on first use, makes things considerably more difficult for the unfamiliar. Sankt is used on maps. Amongst the familiar, it is normal to use abbreviations. The article should use the abbreviated "St." after the title and first use of Sankt in the lede. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:51, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's an abbreviation like hundreds of others St. in WP, see St. Louis or the list i wrote above. May you show a map using Sankt for St. Pölten? OSM, Google, Yahoo maps, Wikimapia, Austrian Map (by the federal office for calibration engineering and geodesy), Atlas by the goverment of Lower Austria, the towns map-service,... show "St.", even weather maps like here and here use St. Pölten... --AleXXw (talk) 16:05, 3 November 2013 (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.

Reverted name change contrary to the above decisions

Back in December of 2014, this page was moved to St Pölten in clear contravention of the previous two consensus decisions (above) to leave it at Sankt Pölten. The move was only half done, as the article lead was left talking about Sankt Pölten without any explanation as to how that place related to the St Pölten in the article title. And the two navigation templates at the foot of the template were not changed, this negating the link->bold effect that should be seen when viewing the template through that article. Because of the counter-consensus nature of the move, and its incomplete nature, I have reverted the move. I am agnostic on which is the better article name, but just ask that any move be properly discussed and then done correctly. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 12:09, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sankt Pölten. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160115084015/http://www2.brno.cz/index.php?lan=en&nav01=2222&nav02=1249 to http://www2.brno.cz/index.php?lan=en&nav01=2222&nav02=1249

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]