|
== previous discussion ==
===[[Borrowdale dance]]===
* [[Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:By country]] (Jan 2005 discussion)
* [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (country-specific topics)]] (April 2005 discussion)
*[[Wikipedia talk:Category titles/Archive 1]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Category titles/Archive 2]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Category titles/Archive 3]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Category titles/Archive 4]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (categories)/Archive 5]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Category titles/Archive: Poll started August 4, 2005]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Category titles/Archive: Summary of poll started August 4, 2005]]
I dont even know what this is but it only has 87 unique google hits so its probaly nn '''Delete'''--[[User:Aranda56|JAranda]]'' | [[User talk:Aranda56|watz sup]] 21:42, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
== topic for discussion ==
* '''Weak keep''' Given the scarcity of Web material about Zimbabwe I'd keep this as it's verifiable although somewhat localised see e.g. [http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:B5etkc0E8ugJ:www.delta.co.zw/home.cfm%3Fpg_id%3D69%26lnk_id%3D7+Borrowdale+dance&hl=en] [[User:Dlyons493|<FONT COLOR="#00FF00">Dl</FONT><FONT COLOR="#44FF00">yo</FONT><FONT COLOR="#99DD11">ns</FONT><FONT COLOR="#DDDD11">493</FONT>]] [[User_talk:Dlyons493|<FONT COLOR="#DDDD11">Ta</FONT><FONT COLOR="#00FF00">lk</FONT>]] 22:46, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
I suggest we limit this discussion to the topic of how to name "nationality x" categories pertaining to the United States assuming such categories will exist. I believe there are at least the following options:
# use "American x"
# use "United States x" (or "US x" or "U.S. x")
# use "x of/in/by/from the United States" even in categories whose other members are "fooish x"
-- [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 03:04, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' and expand. It seems to be associated with musician [[Alick Macheso]] who also has the nickname of Borrowdale see [http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:UvPEMljArvkJ:www.herald.co.zw/index.php%3Fid%3D37415%26pubdate%3D2004-11-04+%22Borrowdale+dance%22&hl=en&lr=lang_en].
: This appears to be a discussion to gather arguments relevant to the nationality category names. Thus all we who don't have new arguments to add are just nodding when we see our comments already having been expressed. ([[User:SEWilco|SEWilco]] 23:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC))
. [[User:Capitalistroadster|Capitalistroadster]] 00:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. It looks to be real, and notable in Zimbabwe. - [[User:Dalbury|Dalbury]] [[User_talk:Dalbury|(talk)]] 02:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
=="American x"==
*'''Keep''' Looks to be notable in Zimbabwe. [[User:Denni|D]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font style="color:green">'''''e'''''</font>]][[User:Denni|nni]][[User_talk:Denni|<font color=#228822>☯</font>]] 00:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
===Arguments for "American x"===
*The most obvious argument for this naming is that "American" is in English the standard term for describing a national of the United States. See for instance the google count for any sort of "United States [occupation]" vs. "American [occupation]"; e.g. 18500 for United States author, 1370000 for American author, close to two full orders of magnitude difference. Even in the most generous cases, American is generally the dominant term: e.g., 614000 for "United States president" and 1890000 for "American president". [[User:Christopherparham|Christopher Parham]] [[User_talk:Christopherparham|(talk)]] 03:44, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
**BTW, although I don't agree with those who claim this term is ambiguous in English (when people go to a category called "American pianists" they know it is about the United States), any concerns about ambiguity should be relieved by assuring that every category using American in this sense contains in its text a clear reference to the fact that the category is about the United States. [[User:Christopherparham|Christopher Parham]] [[User_talk:Christopherparham|(talk)]] 03:55, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
* My argument is about usage. I saw a TV show [on [[CBC]] ]several years ago in which reporters went to all the Provinces of Canda and asked folks what it meant to be an Canadian. The show began in PEI and traveled westward ontil they reached BC, each week spent in another province. After a dozen on so weeks there was only one thing that all Canadians agreed upon. and that was , "We are NOT Americans" [a direct quote]. There was no confusion about who or what "Americans" were. Most everyone in the world knows who "Americans" are. When Iraquis say, "Let's kill Americans" they are not refering to Brazilians or Peruvians and every one knows it." Why are we dicking around with this here? I'll probably have more to say later. [[User:Carptrash|Carptrash]] 05:44, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
*We should go with this one because it is standard English. It is not true that it is nationalistic. If anything it is even more standard and less disputed in the UK than in the US. [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly]] 14:03, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
*For cultural categories, this is parallel to how we handle most countries, e.g. [[:Category:Spanish literature]], [[:Category:Romanian culture]]. However, this is not the case for more specifically "encyclopedic" categories (e.g. [[:Category:Geography of France]], [[:Category:Politics of Spain]].). -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 05:39, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
*Look, this is a pretty straightforward matter. This is an English-language Wikipedia. There are two independent nations in the continental Americas with English as a first language for a great many of their inhabitants—Canada and the United States. (To be fair, we shouldn't forget Jamaica and the various Commonwealth islands in the Caribbean, but I don't think they differ in this regard, either). In the United States, "American" means "pertaining to the United States of America." In Canada, "American" means "pertaining to the United States of America." I can't speak for all my countrymen, but I never met a Canadian who felt that he was being unfairly deprived of the right to label himself as an "American" (in the continental sense) by his neighbours to the south. If anything, making the determination that American should be reserved for use in the continental sense is ''culturally insensitive'', as it connotes the whole continent is "United Statesian." -[[User:The Tom|The Tom]] 05:15, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
*"American" is not used for the United States only in the English speaking world. A substantial number of the equivalent categories in other languages use it too. [[User:CalJW|CalJW]] 10:33, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
*"American" is the term used by the [http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html#People CIA World Book], the U.S. government itself uses American in its legislation, [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:9:./temp/~c10948Jyql::] [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:13:./temp/~c10948Jyql::] [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:49:./temp/~c10948Jyql::] [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:50:./temp/~c10948Jyql::], and the BBC use it to refer to citizens of the United States of America, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4318318.stm] [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/country_profiles/1217752.stm]. It's common usage, an official term and as the English language Wiki we should reflect that usage. Also, since we are discussing usage within category names, specifically in reference to nationality, it should thus not be easily confused with other usages of the term. [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 10:53, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
:*I think we should try to avoid US government sources, only for the reasoning that 1) they are inconsistent and 2) it's more important that we look at this from how other countries perceive the usage of "American". IMHO. <font color=#9999ff>[[Special:Contributions/Who|«»]]</font>[[User:Who|Who]][[User talk:Who|<font color=#00Ff00>?</font><font color=#FF00FF>¿</font><font color=#0033FF>?</font>]]<sup><font color=#cc6600>[[m:User:Who|meta]]</font></sup> 02:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
::I don't follow that argument, I'm afraid. Wikipedia policy is ''Articles that focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally conform to the spelling of that country. For example:''
::* ''Article on the [[American Civil War]]: American English usage and spelling''
::Why, then, should we ignore the policy to use American English usage and instead consider other countries perspectives? Does the article on the [[American Revolution]] thus become the more historically accurate [[Rebellion of the American colonies of the British Empire]], to take into account the perspective of the United Kingdom? [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 10:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
*As a British English speaker, I know that the term "American" refers to the United States. If I needed to refer more generally to the North American continent, I would use "North American"; similarly if I wanted to refer to the South American continent, I would use "South American"; the term "Latin American" is also available where appropriate. (I know that it is not logical that "North American" refers to a larger area than "American". Language, however, is not mathematics). There are relatively few circumstances I can see in the cultural sphere where I would want to lump together both continents, though this might be more common in geographical or zoological contexts; where this is required the formulation "X in/of/by/from the Americas" is perfectly good English and exactly what is required. [[User:Valiantis|Valiantis]] 13:05, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
*I try to avoid using "American" since it is ambiguous, but I'd rather have a consistent system. It's really irritating when choosing categories to have both systems used. -- [[User:Kjkolb|Kjkolb]] 00:34, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
*Yes, people know that when someone says somebody is "American", they come from the United States. It is '''not''' used the same way as "European". If you say to someone from Europe, "Hey there, I'm an American", no one is going to ask, "Oh, really, from what country?" It is common knowledge. --[[User:Lord Voldemort|<font color="purple">Lord Vold</font>]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font color="green">'''''e'''''</font>]][[User:Lord Voldemort|<font color="purple">mort</font>]] <sup><font color="#3D9140">[[User talk:Lord Voldemort|(Dark Mark)]]</font></sup> 21:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
::I don't doubt that is a common understanding in your dialect and experience, but not in everone's, I assure you. [[User:Jonathunder|Jonathunder]] 08:38, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
=== Arguments against "American x"===
See below. In particular, judicial texts do not use this because it is technically incorrect. The fact that many people use it anyway does not make them right - see [[appeal to the majority]]. ''Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should strive towards correctness''. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] 22:06, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
:Judicial texts, in the form of Supreme Court opinions, which, speaking as a British citizen, I believe are highly regarded as judiciary texts, do use ''American''. [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/usscft.pl?CiWebhitsFile=/us/534/184.html&CiRestriction=American] [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/usscft.pl?CiWebhitsFile=/us/534/266.html&CiRestriction=American] [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/usscft.pl?CiWebhitsFile=/us/534/279.html&CiRestriction=American] [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 10:22, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
*Although I have been asked for proof, as my word wasn't good enough, I personally have had to use the term "United States" versus "American" at the Olympics. This policy was handed down to the US military via the Olympic commitee during th 96 Olympics due to complaints from Canadian Olympians who thought the term was offensive. They fealt that they were American as well, and should not be confused with United States Olympians. Although this is a personal preference of those who live in Canada, I have Canadian friends who feel both ways on the subject. I think it should be a form of United States. <font color=#9999ff>[[Special:Contributions/Who|«»]]</font>[[User:Who|Who]][[User talk:Who|<font color=#00Ff00>?</font><font color=#FF00FF>¿</font><font color=#0033FF>?</font>]]<sup><font color=#cc6600>[[m:User:Who|meta]]</font></sup> 02:19, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
=="United States x"==
=== Arguments for "United States x"===
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. That means that is should enforce ''correctness'' over ''popular usage''. For instance, [[Napoleon I of France]] is more commonly known as simply [[Napoleon]], and [[9/11]] is a colloquial shorthand for the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] - but the Wikipedia articles on both use their formally correct names, rather than the commonly used ones. The same principle should apply here. There are two continents known as "North America" and "South America", and one country that is named the "United States of America". Just because many people generally use a different name does not make them right - in particular, judicial texts do not use the word "American" to refer to the country. Most of the arguments above constitute an [[appeal to the majority]] [[logical fallacy]]. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] 22:04, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
:Judicial texts do use the term ''American'', see my rebuttal above. If we are to enforce correctness, as you suggest, I think the Legislature and Judicial Opinion of the United States of America is the best place to discover the formal term. Since they utilise the term ''American'' in reference to their citizens, I suggest it is some form of [[bias]] not to use it. Just because many people oppose the term, it does not make them right. [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 10:26, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
=== Arguments against "United States x"===
* Inconsistent with other countries' categories, in which the national ''adjective'' (Canadian, British, Mexican, Spanish, etc.) is required when this format is used.
* It isn't normal everyday usage.
* As far as I can tell, this whole issue was invented to find a way to annoy Americans. When the people of one piece of the Former Yugoslavia decided to call their new nation Macadonia a large chuck of the Greek population had a hissy fit. "On no: they cried, 'that's a Greek name . . . .etc . . .etc . . . etc" And the Greeks lost. The reality is that folks get to decide for themselves what they are called. Other wise you risk allowing Americans, for example, to decide what everyone else in the world is called. We probably do have the votes. [[User:Carptrash|Carptrash]] 19:07, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
* Just plain clumsy. No one ever referred to "United States music" or "United States culture". -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 05:39, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
:I'm a U.S. citizen, a native speaker of English, and a bit on the pedantic side, but I am not at all annoyed by the use of "United States" as an adjective. It does occur in many contexts. I've even heard "United States culture" to use the specific example you gave. And, of course, we have "United States Congress", "United States passport" (that's what it says on mine), and so forth. [[User:Jonathunder|Jonathunder]] 16:38, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
=="x of/in/by/from the United States"==
NB: Only ''nationality''-based categories are the subject of discussion, where the format ''fooish x'' is generally used. In ''country'' categories, ''x of/in/by/from Foo'' is universally used already.
* Is the preceding note saying that this discussion is intended to apply to all country categories rather than only to nationality-based categories? Somehow I didn't notice announcement of this component. ([[User:SEWilco|SEWilco]] 21:31, 17 October 2005 (UTC))
**Er, no. It was aimed obliquely at Jmabel's comment below. I've clarified it. -[[User:The Tom|The Tom]] 23:04, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Could you clarify what you mean by the distinction between ''Nation'' and ''Country'' as it relates to the United States of America? [[User:65.124.161.144|65.124.161.144]] 15:29, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
:It's actually ''Nationality'' and ''Country'' above. ''Nationality'' is a term used to describe a person's country of origin or country to which they are recognised as a citizen. Hope that helps. [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 18:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
:Can you give example of how it would work in both systems? If all the other countries are using Politics in Spain and such, is the U.S. going to have American Politics instead, or is the change Politics in America? -- [[User:Kjkolb|Kjkolb]] 00:52, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
::The idea would be to avoid use of the form "American x" in any context and use instead "x in/of/by the United States" (using an appropriate preposition). For example,
::*The US-related subcat of [[:Category:Films by country]] would be "Films from the United States" rather than [[:Category:American films]] (even though the other categories are like [[:Category:Spanish films]])
::*The US-related subcat of [[:Category:Aircraft by country]] would be "Aircraft of the United States" rather than [[:Category:U.S. aircraft]] (even though the other categories are like [[:Category:Spanish aircraft]]).
::*Hypothetically, all the subcats of [[:Category:American people by occupation]] would be renamed to "<occupation name> from the United States" rather than the current "American <occupation name>" (whether or not we rename such subcats for other nationalities).
::-- [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 01:32, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
=== Arguments for "x of/in/by/from the United States"===
*It's parallel to how we handle most categories for most countries, e.g. [[:Category:Geography of France]], [[:Category:Politics of Spain]]. However, this is less the case in cultural categories (e.g. [[:Category:Spanish literature]], [[:Category:Romanian culture]]). -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 05:39, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
*This seems to be the best compromise position if a standard is desired and no consensus is reached regarding ''American'' or ''United States''. To me ''Musicians of the United States'' is preferable to ''United States musicians'', which, as others have indicated, seems ungrammatically correct to my ear. [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 13:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
=== Arguments against "x of/in/by/from the United States"===
*It's unnecesssary long and clumsy. [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly]] 14:04, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
*It differs from the categories for nearly all other countries. The other exceptions have unusual names or are politically tricky. As their is a common adjective available, using this non-standard form would be a constant reminder that a political point was being made. [[User:CalJW|CalJW]] 10:29, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
== Where do we go from here ==
While it's useful to have a summary including all pro- and con-arguments on this page, it does not ultimately accomplish anything. I believe the current comments are a bit one-sided because this page hasn't been advertised much. Basically, we can do two things with this issue.
One. We can invoke the standard Wikipolicy on such controversial style issues as British-vs-American-English, or AD/BC vs CE/BCE. Which is to say, we assert that both stances are POV, take no further action, and explicitly forbid any effort to change pages from one style to another, keeping them all in the style they were originally written in.
Or two. We finish off this debate and summarize it into a neat bullet list of points that showcases both sides fairly (and doesn't have signatures or comments like "I agree with the above"), and then advertise a wikiwide poll on the issue. I believe the easiest way to do this would be to hold a simple majority vote with four options: 1) "American", 2) "United States", 3) "Do not standardize", and 4) "don't care either way as long as it's consistent". When the vote closes, all votes in category #4 would be added to #1 or #2, whichever is largest. Hope that made sense :)
[[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] 22:52, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
* I recommend more broadly advertising this page for a bit. There are Wikipedians out there who do dissent with what appears to be a consensus thus far or else this issue wouldn't have come up before. I'd like to see those points appear here and satisfy ourselves that this page contains a representative sampling of opinion from across the wiki before moving to a poll here, involving the same folks who've at least taken the time to read this and familiarize themselves with the nuances of this thing. -[[User:The Tom|The Tom]]
*Radiant's second suggestion sounds good to me. -- [[User:Kjkolb|Kjkolb]] 00:35, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
::I'm disturbed by the idea that any votes for consistency get added to the larger of the two options, as this could lead to a theoretical situation where a one vote victory ensues. I think people who endorse a standard should be expected to endorse a given standard, otherwise I'm not sure how they can truly endors a standard. I also feel we should not discount the third option ''x of/in/by/from the United States'', which matches other problematic nations, e.g. [[:Category:Musicians of the Democratic Republic of the Congo]]. I'm also not sure that a vote is entirely neccessary, consensus can be just as easily achieved through discussion. Like [[User:The Tom|The Tom]], I would like to wait and see more opinion. [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 10:45, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
*I'm not opposed to discussing it more. But this is really a binary issue. We know all the arguments both ways, and we still disagree; there exists no compromise, and from a certain point on there will only be "me-too" comments. This time the page leans mostly one way, last time we tried it it leaned mostly the other way.
*Regarding the four vote types - a one-vote victory can ensue anyway, regardless of voting method, so that's really a moot point. The reason that I'm suggesting it this way is that there are many people that want a standard, but do not particularly care which standard it is. An alternative way of putting it would be to have two (simultaneous) polls - one that says "should we standardize this?" and the second that says "assuming we standardize this, what should the standard be"? Maybe that's clearer. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] 12:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
*:I for one am not of the opinion that consensus is reached by a one vote majority. I'm also unclear how, if there are three options on this page, it becomes a binary issue. [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 13:12, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
* People are using the terms "consensus" and "opinion" here. However, "wait and see more opinion" is difficult when the topic is a list of arguments. I look at the list, see my arguments already present, and have nothing to add. The only "opinion" which will be added are new arguments. If you're counting the size of the list of arguments, the winner may simply be the topic for which there are the most positive comments which can be made although that may merely reflect that topic has more complexity about which comments can be made. You have to move to a format which invites collection of answers from all participants before you have any idea whether there is a "consensus" of anything. ([[User:SEWilco|SEWilco]] 15:11, 19 October 2005 (UTC))
**Fair play. How about adding some support sections to each area, and add ''no standard'' section. That would allow us to see where the land lies regarding any consensus? [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 15:21, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
***Sounds reasonable (it's also roughly what I suggested :) ). I'd suggest merging some of the sections - the sections against "American" and "United States" are pretty much redundant with the sections ''for'' the other one. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] 21:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
****Well obviously. Great minds and all that. It just wouldn't be a binding poll. [[User:Steve block|Steve block]] [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 19:13, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
***** A list of arguments is not a poll anyway. Give me a proposal to vote or comment on; people haven't been voting on numerous arguments (and that is difficult because early voters wouldn't see all the arguments). ([[User:SEWilco|SEWilco]] 16:39, 21 October 2005 (UTC))
== Not again ==
We've argued about this practically since the first article was created. We've been round and round on the same arguments and never reached consensus. I don't see any chance that we're going to reach consensus this time either. The arguments always boil down to:
{| border=1
||"American"||"US"
|- valign="top"
|
* "American" is the colloquial usage. Some people are emotionally attached to that usage.
* There is no commonly accepted adjectival form of US.
|
* "American" is inherently ambiguous. At least a few people are occasionally confused and do not immediately know which sense is intended.
* The form "a US author" ''is'' grammatically acceptable.
|}
I have argued before that our mission as an encyclopedia compels us to strive for precision in thought and language. Even if only one person in a thousand will be confused, we should attempt to be as clear as possible. America refers to a geography, some senses of which are not contiguous with the nationality. Personally, I find nothing frustrating or pejorative about being called a US <insert noun here>. However, the bottom line is that Wikipedia is inconsistent. Fix the ones you see and don't get into edit wars over it either way. [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] [[User talk:Rossami|(talk)]] 03:43, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
*Good points - but the issue frequently comes up at [[WP:CFD]], as people in good faith nominate categories for renaming either way. If there was a significant majority in favor of either side, we could use that to automatically decide those issues, rather than rehashing the debate every time. At the moment, it can be a lottery depending on who happens to read CFD that week. On the other hand, it may sound unwikish to set such a tight standard. I do believe that repetitive discussion is pointless, so in my opinion we should either adopt the rule to "never rename" (like we do with AD/CE issues), or we should adopt a rule to "always rename" to either standard. But YMMV. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] 22:31, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
**Is it possible to have the rule be to follow the majority of entries in each category? While not the best it would establish how to decide which way to go. Of course this suggestion is not problem free if you have multiple levels of subcats with diffrent leanings. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] 22:59, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
***That would be somewhat impractical, as this mostly applies to cats like [[:Category:Countryname Profession]]. Generally, those categories contain the articles of dozens of people from that country, which can be worded in a wide variety of ways. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] 10:27, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
*I don't accept that people are confused. Some say the usage is unclear because they are against it, but it seems improbable that they don't know what it means in everyday English as well as the rest of us. Indeed they may be ''more'' keenly aware of what it is being used to signify than the rest of us. [[User:CalJW|CalJW]] 21:52, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
== Straw poll==
Okay, since people feel the arguments sections above have rather played themselves out, let's see where the support lies for each position. Add your support to the section or sections as you see fit using <nowiki># ~~~~</nowiki>.
How should categories related to the [[United States]] be handled in categories where the [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories)|naming convention]] is otherwise ''Nationality something'', such as [[:Category:Literature by country]] or all the subcategories of [[:Category:American people by occupation]]. This affects most subcategories of [[:Category:Categories by nationality]] but relatively few subcategories of [[:Category:Categories by country]].
=== For "American x" ===
# [[User:The Tom|The Tom]] 05:47, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
# [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 13:30, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
# [[User:Valiantis|Valiantis]] 15:38, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
# [[User:Christopherparham|Christopher Parham]] [[User_talk:Christopherparham|(talk)]] 17:22, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
#[[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 22:35, 23 October 2005 (UTC), obviously, since it is the only correct term.
# [[User:Idont havaname|Idont Havaname]] 01:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
#[[User:Kjkolb|Kjkolb]] 10:41, 24 October 2005 (UTC), this is a hard one, pitting my hatred for ambiguity against my love for standardization.
# [[User:CalJW|CalJW]] 21:53, 24 October 2005 (UTC) It is not ambiguous. Opponents of this usage understand it perfectly well. [[User:CalJW|CalJW]] 21:53, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
=== For "United States x" ===
#Users should appreciate that while for native English speakers it is usual to use "America" for the USA, combinations such as "Amerindian", "Latin American", "South American" and even "North American" merely confuse the issue. Although there are ther "United States" about, the USA is by far the best known. --[[User:MacRusgail|MacRusgail]] 16:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
#1st preference. Anything but "American x", which is highly ambiguous and therefore completely inappropriate for usage in an encyclopedia. [[User:BlankVerse|<font color=green>''Blank''</font><font color= #F88017>''Verse''</font>]]<font color=#2554C7> </font>[[User talk:BlankVerse|<font color=#F660AB>∅</font>]] 20:25, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
=== For "x of/in/by/from the United States" ===
# <font color=#9999ff>[[Special:Contributions/Who|«»]]</font>[[User:Who|Who]][[User talk:Who|<font color=#00Ff00>?</font><font color=#FF00FF>¿</font><font color=#0033FF>?</font>]]<sup><font color=#cc6600>[[m:User:Who|meta]]</font></sup> 06:36, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
#2nd preference. Anything but "American x", which is highly ambiguous and therefore completely inappropriate for usage in an encyclopedia. [[User:BlankVerse|<font color=green>''Blank''</font><font color= #F88017>''Verse''</font>]]<font color=#2554C7> </font>[[User talk:BlankVerse|<font color=#F660AB>∅</font>]] 20:26, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
=== "Do not standardise" ===
# [[User:Christopherparham|Christopher Parham]] [[User_talk:Christopherparham|(talk)]] 17:22, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
| 