|
<center>[[Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (anglicization)|Anglicization]]<center>
}}
== Deletions of names ==
Perhaps someone experienced can chime in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Serols#Your_revert here]? Regarding deletion of names other than English names. Thanks.--[[Special:Contributions/2604:2000:E010:1100:5459:345F:8577:54B2|2604:2000:E010:1100:5459:345F:8577:54B2]] ([[User talk:2604:2000:E010:1100:5459:345F:8577:54B2|talk]]) 18:41, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
== RfC: Tiebreaker for native vs. translated name ==
[[WP:USEENGLISH]] says that we should use the name which is mostly commonly found in English-language sources. Sometimes, as with the [[Technical University of Berlin|Technical University of Berlin / Technische Universität Berlin]], both the native name and a translation are widely used in English sources and it is impossible to tell which one is more common. In these cases, what should the tiebreaker be?
# Give the edge to the [[WP:OFFICIALNAME]], i.e. what the subject would prefer to be known as in English, which could be the native name or the translation.
# Give the edge to the English translation. Note that [[WP:USEENGLISH]] does not currently say that we prefer names in English, but rather names which are most commonly used in English sources.
# Keep the long-standing title, per [[WP:TITLECHANGES]]. This is the general default option when there is no specific guidance to do something different.
[[User:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red">King of ♥</b>]][[User talk:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red"> ♦</b>]][[Special:Contributions/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♣</b>]][[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♠</b>]] 05:08, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
*'''Comment''': Thank you for the well-written (neutrally phrased) RfC. This particular combination of circumstances seems unlikely to arise very often, so I'm not sure we need a general rule for it. Perhaps you meant to refer to [[WP:TITLECHANGES]] rather than [[MOS:RETAIN]]. I don't think [[MOS:RETAIN]] applies, since that is about different variations ''of English'', whereas here we have a question of English versus non-English. In the absence of a consensus in an RM discussion, I suggest that the article title should not be changed (and that is what happened in this example case). I tend to put very little weight on an institution's own preference, in the interest of maintaining Wikipedia as an independent source (e.g., in the spirit of [[MOS:TM]] / [[WP:TITLETM]] / [[MOS:ALLCAPS]]). When choosing between a title that is not very understandable/recognizable in English and one that is, I would tend somewhat toward the English-language title. Not very strongly, but ''somewhat'' preferring English. —[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 19:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
*:Good catch, I've updated [[MOS:RETAIN]] to [[WP:TITLECHANGES]], thanks. -- [[User:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red">King of ♥</b>]][[User talk:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red"> ♦</b>]][[Special:Contributions/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♣</b>]][[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♠</b>]] 03:26, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
* I would definitely '''oppose''' #1, as the article title should be based on secondary, not primary sources. #2 seems like a good rule of thumb for editors ''when initially creating an article'', but I fully '''support''' the interpretation of #3 that [[WP:TITLECHANGES]] would be the governing policy without a clear preference in English language sources for either the translated or native name. [[User:Vanisaac|Van]][[User talk:Vanisaac|Isaac]]<sub><small>[[WP:WikiProject Writing systems|WS]]</small></sub><sup style="margin-left:-3.0ex">[[Special:Contributions/Vanisaac|cont]]</sup> 03:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
*:It's difficult to argue for [[WP:TITLECHANGES]] when [[WP:NAMECHANGES]] also apply.[[User:SFBB|SFBB]] ([[User talk:SFBB|talk]]) 15:47, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
* '''None of the above''' – borderline cases, like [[Technical University of Berlin]] vs. [[Technische Universität Berlin]], obviously need to be sorted on a case-by-case basis. [[Talk:Technical University of Berlin]] has several RMs spanning more than a decade – although the idea is laudable to get it sorted once and for all via a guideline update, that won't work: the solution hardcoded in guidance may then work for this particular case (because of being tailored to that case), but not for other cases. --[[User:Francis Schonken|Francis Schonken]] ([[User talk:Francis Schonken|talk]]) 05:22, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
*:I assume you mean option 3 then; that is the status quo which applies if there is no guideline update. -- [[User:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red">King of ♥</b>]][[User talk:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red"> ♦</b>]][[Special:Contributions/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♣</b>]][[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♠</b>]] 05:37, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
*::No, I didn't mean #3 – I meant this was another ill-prepared RfC, not even listing the most obvious choice (was just trying to convey that message as politely as possible). --[[User:Francis Schonken|Francis Schonken]] ([[User talk:Francis Schonken|talk]]) 10:01, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
*:::And the case-by-case basis failed here, and there was no consensus. -- [[User:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red">King of ♥</b>]][[User talk:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red"> ♦</b>]][[Special:Contributions/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♣</b>]][[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♠</b>]] 13:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
*::::"failed"? – I don't see any failure whatsoever in the events leading up to this RfC, and certainly not against the [[WP:CONSENSUS]] policy. The RfC has, however, again, written failure all over it, while not following the simple recommendations of [[WP:RFC]] – again, the RfC was not well prepared in contravention of that guidance. --[[User:Francis Schonken|Francis Schonken]] ([[User talk:Francis Schonken|talk]]) 07:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
*:::::By "failed" I don't mean a failure in process - I simply mean that the discussion failed to reach a consensus. None of the other participants seem to have any trouble with this RfC, so if you're having trouble understanding my words I don't think it's my problem. -- [[User:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red">King of ♥</b>]][[User talk:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red"> ♦</b>]][[Special:Contributions/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♣</b>]][[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts|<b style="color:black"> ♠</b>]] 17:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
*'''Use English''' should be given preference. It's already common practice. [[User:Renata3|Renata]] ([[User talk:Renata3|talk]]) 04:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
*:The [[WP:USEENGLISH]] criteria do not provide any help in cases when both names seem to widely used in English sources. [[WP:USEENGLISH]] is about the most widely used used in English sources and not about using English words.[[User:SFBB|SFBB]] ([[User talk:SFBB|talk]]) 15:19, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
*When two names are widely used in English sources (i.e. the main criteria in [[WP:USEENGLISH]] does not apply), I believe (for consistency purposes) that the edge should be given to the [[WP:OFFICIALNAME]], as it is the case in Mumbai, Nur-Sultan, Eswatini, or Kolkata, among many others. Furthermore, and especially when the name has changed and in line with both [[WP:DIVIDEDUSE]] and [[WP:NAMECHANGES]], it is important to take into account the evolution of the naming in English sources and the date of the references.[[User:SFBB|SFBB]] ([[User talk:SFBB|talk]]) 15:28, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
*:In the particular case at hands, there has been a change in the official position of the university towards its English name in 2014, which comes to be like name change. Hence, it is difficual to argue for [[WP:TITLECHANGES]] in this case.[[User:SFBB|SFBB]] ([[User talk:SFBB|talk]]) 15:39, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
*Give the edge to the common native name (which is not necessarily the official name, any more than it is in English-speaking countries). Translating for the sake of it is never a good idea. [[WP:UE]] should only apply if an English translation is overwhelmingly used in English-language sources. It may surprise some, but there are many of us native English-speakers who can handle names in other languages with perfect ease and regard slavish (and often poor) translation without evidence of common usage as ignorant and unnecessary. We are probably the same people who prefer foreign-languages films to be subtitled rather than dubbed! Incidentally, I am dubious about "what the subject would prefer to be known as in English", as I have seen some translations into very poor English on official websites and also misguided assumptions that native English speakers ''can't'' handle furrin and need to have everything translated. -- [[User:Necrothesp|Necrothesp]] ([[User talk:Necrothesp|talk]]) 10:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
==''[[La Comédie humaine]]'' or ''[[The Human Comedy]]''==
A discussion regarding which title form is more appropriate at [[Talk:La Comédie humaine#Requested move 3 June 2020]] may be of interest. —[[User:Roman Spinner|'''Roman Spinner''']] <small>[[User talk:Roman Spinner|(talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Roman Spinner|contribs)]]</small> 22:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
== Russian names ==
| 