Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:44, 19 November 2005

An attempt to work out a simple policy for geographic names in Central/Eastern Europe. The basic assumptions for the policy are:

1. it should be practical: simple, easy to understand and to follow
2. it does not have to be perfect, some controversies will not be avoided

No voting yet. Let's try to work out several reasonable proposals first (the less the better ;-). Please use the talk page for the discussion.

Proposal B

Proposal B version 5

1. The title: The widely accepted English name or in absence thereof, the current local official name is to be used. A historical or foreign language name can be used in the title of an article about a place only in case of a redirect to the appropriate article titled according to the above rule.
2. The contents: For the names that were changed (not merely translated), the historical name can be used but only in appropriate historical context. For all other cases, the same name as in the title is to be used. When mentioned in a historical context, the name can be additionally accompanied by the appropriate historical (foreign language) name in parentheses, where reasonable.
3. The first line: The same as the title. Other names can also be listed but only these that were used within the article according to rule #2.

Proposal C

Proposal C version 2

1. The title: The widely accepted English name or in absence thereof, the current local official name is to be used
2. The contents: The same as the title, unless mentioned in a historical context, when the widely accepted name in modern English language academic literature devoted to the topic is preferred. This is largely left to the authors who write the articles since they are more likely to research literature than casual readers who might still have strong political preferences. If the current local official name is different from such an accepted usage in a particular historical context, the modern name may be added in parentheses, where reasonable.
3. The first line: Other names are to be listed in the first line of the article only if they have any modern English usage. Otherwise, while not listed in the first line, they still may be used within text as context prescribes.

Proposal C version 3

1. The title: The widely accepted English name or in absence thereof, the current local official name is to be used.
2. The contents: The same as the title, unless mentioned in a historical context, when the widely accepted name in modern English language academic literature devoted to the topic is preferred. This is largely left to the editors. If the current local official name is different from such an accepted usage in a particular historical context, the modern name may be added in parentheses, where reasonable.
3. The first line: The same as the title. Other names can also be listed but only these that were used within the article according to rule #2.

Proposal C version 4

1. The title: The widely accepted English name or in absence thereof, the current local official name is to be used.
2. The contents: The same as the title, unless mentioned in a historical context, when the widely accepted name in modern English language academic literature devoted to the topic is preferred. This is largely left to the editors. If the current local official name is different from such an accepted usage in a particular historical context, the modern name should at least once be added in parentheses, then where reasonable.
3. The first line: Other names are to be listed in the first line of the article only if they have any modern English usage. Otherwise, while not listed in the first line, they still may be used within text as context prescribes, according to rule #2

Proposal D

Proposal D version 1

1. The title: For an article about a geographical location, the widely accepted English name or in absence thereof, the current local official name is to be used. A historical or foreign language name can be used in the title of an article about a place only in case of a redirect to the appropriate article titled according to the above rule.
2. The first line: The title name in the first line can be followed by a list of alternative names that are or have been in English usage. Any archaic usage name in the list has clearly to be marked as such.
3. The contents: The same name as in title is preferred. In historical context a historical name different to the one in the title can be used only if it has well established English usage. If in doubt always fallback to the name from the title. In case a historical name is used, it should be followed by the modern name in parentheses at least on one, preferably the first occurence.

Proposal D version 2

Scope: Articles about contemporary geographical locations only (for now)

1. The title: For an article about a geographical location, the single widely accepted English name or in absence thereof, the current local official name is to be used (or the most widely used of them in case there are more than one). A historical or foreign language name can be used in the title of an article about a place only in case of a redirect to the appropriate article titled according to the above rule.
2. The first line: The title name in the first line can be followed by a list of alternative names that are or have been in English usage. All names on the list should have briefly explained their origin and usage, if not obvious. Any archaic usage name in the list has clearly to be marked as such. The foreign names should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages. Alternatively, the foreign names can be explained in an ethymology section immediately following the lead paragraph. In this case, the redundant list of the names in the article's first line is not recommended.
3. The contents: The same name as in title is preferred. In historical context a historical name different to the one in the title can be used only if it has well established English usage. If in doubt always fallback to the name from the title. In case a historical name is used, it should be followed by the modern name in parentheses at least on one, preferably the first occurence in a given section.

Proposal D version 3

Scope: Articles about contemporary geographical locations only (for now)

1. The title: For an article about a geographical location, the single widely accepted English name or in absence thereof, the current local official name is to be used (or the most widely used of them in case there are more than one). A historical or foreign language name can be used in the title of an article about a place only in case of a redirect to the appropriate article titled according to the above rule.
2. The first line: The title name in the first line can be followed by a list of alternative names if they or their derivatives are or have been in English usage. All names on the list should have briefly explained their origin and usage, if not obvious. Any archaic usage name in the list has clearly to be marked as such. The foreign names should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages. Alternatively, the foreign names can be explained in an ethymology section immediately following the lead paragraph. In this case, the redundant list of the names in the article's first line is not recommended.
3. The contents: The same name as in title is preferred. In historical context a historical name different to the one in the title can be used only if it has well established English usage. If in doubt always fallback to the name from the title. In case a historical name is used, it should be followed by the modern name in parentheses at least on one, preferably the first occurence in a given section.

Proposal E

Italic indicates changes from proposal D 3.

Scope: Articles about contemporary geographical locations only (for now)

1. The title: For an article about a geographical location, the single widely accepted English name is to be used. If there is no applicable English name, the current local official name can be used (or the most widely used of them in case there are more than one). Thus if there is an English alternative, a historical or foreign language name can be used in the title of an article about a place only in case of a redirect to the appropriate article titled according to the above rule.
2. The lead: The title name in the first line can be followed by a list of alternative names if they or their derivatives are or have been in English usage. All names on the list should have briefly explained their origin and usage, if not obvious. Any archaic usage names in the list, as well as names used before the standardization of English orthography should be clearly marked as such. Foreign language names are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages. Alternatively, all alternative names can be moved to and explained in an ethymology parsection immediately following the lead paragraph. In this case, the redundant list of the names in the article's first line should be replaced with the following text: (known also by several alternative names) and a footnote indicating that there is a separate paragraph or section with alternative names. Once such a section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line.
3. The contents (this applies both to the article on a given geographical place and to other articles linking to it): The same name as in title is preferred, however in historical context a historical name different to the one in the title can be used, but only if it has widely accepted English usage. In case a historical name is used, it should be followed by the modern name in parentheses at least on one, preferably the first occurence in a given section. If more then one historical name with well estabilished English usage is applicable for that historical context, it should be followed by the other applicable names in parentheses at least on one, preferably the first occurence in a given section, after the modern English name. Foreign names can be used only if there are no estabilished English names. Those uses and rationale for them should be described in the appopriate ethymology section and/or on the article's talk page.
4. Dispute resolution process: This guideline should be used in all articles where an objection have been raised regarding naming conventions of geographical places. This guideline may be revised to be applicable in situations not envisioned by its current creators, however please use the talk page to obtain support for your change before changing this guideline. If there is a dispute regarding the naming convention in the contents of the article, to prevent revert wars a modern English name should be used in all occurences until a consensus is reached on the relevant talk page. If in doubt the name from the title is a recommended safe choice. It is recommened that for a repeated naming disputes, a template is created and used on talk pages of affected articles, directing discutants to a single talk page where they can reach a consensus.