Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2011/November
This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Multiple English spelling
I have carefully read the Naming convention for geographic names, and remained with one open question: how shall we treat in WP multiple English spelling?
My question does not refer to the title, but to the lead section (and infobox). My question is also purely formal, so I'm not asking if we shall include multiple common English spelling, but rather how.
Here are two example where the alternative spellings are presented with different formatting:
Taboche: Taboche (also known as Tawoche, Tobuche, Tāuje, Taweche, Tawache or Tawetse)
Gauri Sankar: Gauri Sankar or Gauri Shankar or Gaurishankar My questions:
1) Shall we prefer the first or second formatting?
2) Shall we keep the bold, knowing that all are just different spelling for the same name?
3) Should the infobox also reflect the diffent spelling, or only the most common English spelling?
Thank you for any advice.
- As a reader, I would prefer the format used in the Taboche example as it gives a clear and unequivocal relationship between the names without any POV. The infobox should remain unclutttered and contain only the article name unless an alternative is so necessary to the point that leaving it out would be confusing. --Mike Cline (talk) 16:17, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- The bold is significant; it marks those names as synonums for the article title. It is an esthetic judgment when there is too much bold, in which case a separate names section is recommended. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback.--Pseudois (talk) 16:20, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
- The bold is significant; it marks those names as synonums for the article title. It is an esthetic judgment when there is too much bold, in which case a separate names section is recommended. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Viipuri/Vyborg naming RfC
For editors who are interested, there is an RfC over at Talk:Continuation War about which name we should use for the town of Vyborg/Viipuri during World War II. This RfC was devised as part of the Continuation War MedCab mediation, and in discussion there it was felt that the outcome of the RfC may have ramifications for these naming conventions. If you could comment, it would be very much appreciated. The RfC thread can be found here. Regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 14:55, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
- I strongly support people taking part this RfC, because it's result will affect naming not only in Vyborg-article, but all around Wikipedia. --Whiskey (talk) 10:25, 25 November 2011 (UTC)