Talk:Weißenfels

Requested move

Please participate in centralised discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias --Espoo (talk) 14:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was Not moved per lack of consensus. Non-admin closure (Help clear the backlog). Cybercobra (talk) 05:57, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weißenfels → Weissenfels — 1) Spelling used in English by the town itself. 2) Weißenfels incomprehensible to almost all Wikipedia users. Probably 99% of WP users read it as Weibenfels. 3) (This is a completely different problem from umlauts, which do not need to be ignored or changed to ae etc. because they do not make the words incomprehensible i.e. unreadable to WP users.) --Espoo (talk) 20:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. ß is in use on great many enwiki articles and if you check the interwikis you'll see almost all of them use it here. The 99% idea is unsupported and unsupportable - it seems much more likely that most people interested in reading up on relatively obscure German cities will either already know ß or want to learn about it. Espoo is making a number of move requests on articles he has never edited in response to a debate elsewhere on unrelated issues. Please let's not do this. Haukur (talk) 22:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- An ad hominem argument discredits the person presenting it, not the original argument. More info why my move request is perfectly valid can be found here. --Espoo (talk) 23:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please let's not do this. It would be much better to have a centralized discussion on a convenient policy page to discuss the generic issue of what characters can be used in article titles rather than a discussion rehashing essentially the same arguments over a variety of different article talk pages. Haukur (talk) 23:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per town's own English usage, that the requested title is in ASCII, and the fact that monoglot anglophones, and non-European polyglot anglophones will not recognize eszett is not a BETA. 76.66.197.2 (talk) 06:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - no reason to follow the usage of one website. To follow just one source entirely misses the point of WP:NAME, where we look at the usage of reliable English-language sources taken as a whole. WP:OFFICIALNAMES, although not policy, is a pretty accurate picture of Wikipedia's use of "official" names - we consider them, but do not automatically prefer them. The rest of the rationale about how readers pronounce the name to themselves is pure irrelevant speculation. There's precious few English people who can correctly pronounce Hódmezővásárhely or Chkhorotsqu either - picking out ß or þ for extinction does precious little for anybody in that regard. It's not worth losing the consistency of naming when redirects from the alternatives exist, and making the change helps no-one. This is a non-starter. Knepflerle (talk) 12:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Where there is no established, common English usage, the local name should be used. Replying to the argument above, the Web site of the town itself does not consistently use the spelling with "ss". The banner at the top of the page has "Weißenfels an der Saale" and the second article on the home page is "Let us take you on a guided walk through Weißenfels". --Boson (talk) 15:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I can find no instance of Weißenfels or Weissenfels in my English sources, so recommend we stick with the original since ß is accepted by Wikipedia. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Weißenfels. 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/20150207143103/http://www.gerald-drebes.ch/page2.html to http://www.gerald-drebes.ch/page2.html

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) 06:35, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]