Talk:Derry/Londonderry name dispute
Latest comment: 10 months ago by ModernDayTrilobite in topic Requested move 6 August 2023
 | Northern Ireland | ||||||
| |||||||
 | Ireland Mid‑importance | ||||||
| |||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
The real question is - why does Wikipedia take a side rather than using the official name?
I remember many years ago when Wikipedia first started I corrected 'Derry' to Londonderry (not knowing there was all this backstory to it - I tried to find Derry on Google maps and at that time it wasn't listed as a secondary name, so I assumed it was someone using slang, and innocent minded me corrected it only to end up getting banned from editing the article and served on my old talk page and abused) - it surprised me that Wikipedia would take--back then and now--such a partisan stance on the topic. I get that it's slowly been stacked by far leftists, but supporting communist radicals over the official name that the people, government, and foreign nationals know a region as is a bit absurd. Although it wouldn't be the first time Wikipedia has found itself in bed with terrorists. Cough, Lockerbie, cough. 121.210.33.50 (talk) 02:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia uses names most commonly used in published sources. And that's the first time I've heard the Apprentice Boys of Derry called Communist radicals! Cordless Larry (talk) 07:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- The Apprentice boys were a bunch of working class youths engaged in armed rebellion against King James. That sounds pretty radical to me
. Tlhslobus (talk) 22:11, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- The Apprentice boys were a bunch of working class youths engaged in armed rebellion against King James. That sounds pretty radical to me
- Might I recommend Conservapedia if you find Wikipedia too leftist ;-) Anyway these talk pages are for discussing improvements to the associated article not so that people can soapbox. Dmcq (talk) 11:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but soap-boxing or not, the originator has actually raised a reasonable question regarding our usage that some readers might want to see answered, most logically in the Style Guides section. But supplying such readers with an answer might be complicated given our rules, so I've tried to start a discussion on the matter in a new section below.Tlhslobus (talk) 22:11, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Style Guides:Wikipedia?
I feel the article would be improved by saying something about Wikipedia's own usage in the Style Guides section, as that might be of interest to quite a lot of people (including me, both as a reader and as an editor), and because its omission probably must look rather strange to readers who may want this info (as I do). However I'm reluctant to try without first hearing positive feedback from here, both because I'm not too sure about what our usage actually is, and because reliable primary sources would not be a problem, but the likely shortage of Reliable secondary Sources probably would be, so that I suspect one could only include it by citing WP:IAR and WP:5P5, which, per WP:NOTCOMPULSORY and WP:BNO, I'm rather reluctant to do without getting favourable feedback here first. Tlhslobus (talk) 21:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think it's appropriate to mention Wikipedia's own style guides here. Wikipedia isn't a trend setter, it follows reliable sources. Mentioning it here could imply that Wikipedia is a source of a style for others to use and I don't think that's appropriate. Canterbury Tail talk 21:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback. I don't think Wikipedia has any clear style guide on this particular matter (though if it does, I would love to see it mentioned in the article). But I think interested readers are entitled to know how we deal with the question and why, and I think it should be perfectly possible to provide them with an answer without implying we are a style guide to be imitated. I suggested the Style Guides section because it seems the logical place at present, but a separate Wikipedia Usage section would also be fine by me, even if it only says basically something like what you have just said above ("Wikipedia ... follows reliable sources.") with perhaps a few Wikilinks to relevant sections such as WP:RS and WP:COMMONNAME. Alternatively we already have one or more articles about Wikipedia, and it may be possible to give the answer there (if it is not already given there) and to Wikilink to there from our article. Or we might just say "For the main rules governing Wikipedia's own usage of Derry and Londonderry, see X, Y,and Z" (though I'm not yet clear to which sections we should link, but WP:COMMONNAME would probably be one of them; WP:ENGVAR might or might not also be relevant; and so on). After all we are supposed to be here to inform and serve our readers, not to keep them in the dark on the basis of unhelpful rules or traditions. Tlhslobus (talk) 22:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- Wikipedia Manual of Style for this issue can be found at WP:IMOS, specifically WP:DERRY. Even so I'm of the opinion that Wikipedia should not put its style guides in an encyclopaedic article like this, other usages and guides inform us we don't want to be the ones informing others from a process perspective. Canterbury Tail talk 13:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback. I don't think Wikipedia has any clear style guide on this particular matter (though if it does, I would love to see it mentioned in the article). But I think interested readers are entitled to know how we deal with the question and why, and I think it should be perfectly possible to provide them with an answer without implying we are a style guide to be imitated. I suggested the Style Guides section because it seems the logical place at present, but a separate Wikipedia Usage section would also be fine by me, even if it only says basically something like what you have just said above ("Wikipedia ... follows reliable sources.") with perhaps a few Wikilinks to relevant sections such as WP:RS and WP:COMMONNAME. Alternatively we already have one or more articles about Wikipedia, and it may be possible to give the answer there (if it is not already given there) and to Wikilink to there from our article. Or we might just say "For the main rules governing Wikipedia's own usage of Derry and Londonderry, see X, Y,and Z" (though I'm not yet clear to which sections we should link, but WP:COMMONNAME would probably be one of them; WP:ENGVAR might or might not also be relevant; and so on). After all we are supposed to be here to inform and serve our readers, not to keep them in the dark on the basis of unhelpful rules or traditions. Tlhslobus (talk) 22:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Question
Why is this seen as a fair compromise? To have City as "Derry" and County of "Londonderry" when pageviews show the former with more than 3 million all-time views, and the latter with 700 thousand. Zilch-nada (talk) 11:25, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Requested move 6 August 2023
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Derry/Londonderry name dispute → Derry–Londonderry naming dispute – Per MOS:ENBETWEEN, an en-dash is used to express a parallel connection between two words or objects. See Denali–Mount McKinley naming dispute and Eye–hand span. 〜 Festucalex • talk 13:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose The nickname "Stroke City" (see Derry/Londonderry name dispute#Response to the dispute) comes from the stroke in Derry/Londonderry, it's not nicknamed "En-Dash City" or "Hyphen City". Kathleen's bike (talk) 13:10, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- The stroke proposal isn't what the article is about. It's about the names "Derry" and "Londonderry". You can see that the "Derry/Londonderry" proposal is not official or widespread in any capacity, and neither side of the debate actually uses it. It only appears in the article as a couple of sentences in one section. 〜 Festucalex • talk 13:42, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I see no advantage at all. The MOS is not leading in this matter but the common use outside Wikipedia. The proposed name is plain unused there. The Banner talk 14:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- That's the exact opposite of what it is outside Wikipedia. "Derry" and "Londonderry" are the COMMONNAMEs, while "Derry/Londonderry" isn't. 〜 Festucalex • talk 14:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- No, it is not. The dispute is commonly named "Derry/Londonderry name dispute", not "Derry–Londonderry naming dispute". The MOS does not overwrite the common use. Nor can the MOS be used to introduce a new term. The Banner talk 14:42, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @The Banner: Can you prove that the dispute itself has this specific COMMONNAME with this specific punctuation? 〜 Festucalex • talk 14:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Try Google. The Banner talk 14:54, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @The Banner: Already did, that's why I asked you in case I missed anything (it's your claim, after all, you're the one who's supposed to prove it). I can't find anything definite, only WP:MIRRORs and a mere 2 books that almost definitely got the name from Wikipedia. Nothing to prove a WP:COMMONNAME that would override the MOS guideline. 〜 Festucalex • talk 15:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Try Google. The Banner talk 14:54, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @The Banner: Can you prove that the dispute itself has this specific COMMONNAME with this specific punctuation? 〜 Festucalex • talk 14:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- No, it is not. The dispute is commonly named "Derry/Londonderry name dispute", not "Derry–Londonderry naming dispute". The MOS does not overwrite the common use. Nor can the MOS be used to introduce a new term. The Banner talk 14:42, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- That's the exact opposite of what it is outside Wikipedia. "Derry" and "Londonderry" are the COMMONNAMEs, while "Derry/Londonderry" isn't. 〜 Festucalex • talk 14:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Support with a comment that opposing voters are making this more convoluted than it needs to be. Killuminator (talk) 19:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose As per WP:COMMONNAME which states "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)" The stroke appears to be the most common separator between the two names when they are used together in English-language sources giving rise to the nickname of "Stroke City". Tk420 (talk) 21:53, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Support It seems the MOS would corroborate this move. Aneirinn (talk) 02:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose as project convention doesn't override real-world WP:COMMONNAME use. As noted by other contributors above, and reflecting the Stroke City redirect and section, the separator used outside the project is the slash or "stroke". Not a dash. Per this article on the subject, "[m]any official documents in Northern Ireland now use "Derry/Londonderry" giving rise to the nickname 'Stroke City'." See for example the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission report "The Derry/Londonderry Report on Upholding the Human Right to Culture in Post-Conflict Societies" or UK govt press release on "Derry / Londonderry named UK City of Culture 2013", etc. Can't support a change which (to my mind) adds no material value and detracts from this convention and specific element of the topic.. Guliolopez (talk) 17:17, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Guliolopez: The way I see it, this would be endorsing the non-COMMON slash name, which is POV. After all, the article for the city itself isn't titled with the slash name. Neither Nationalists nor Loyalists actually use the slash name, and both object to it. A dash would put both the actual COMMONNAMEs on equal footing. 〜 Festucalex • talk 17:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I simply don't agree with that premise or argument. To my ear and my eye, the slash/stroke separator is commonly used when referring to the topic. So much so that the punctuation/separator become a form of short-hand for the topic itself. "Stroke City". Ignoring or overriding that doesn't make sense to me. In the context of COMMONNAME and ENGVAR. As it doesn't, it seems, to the (apparently mostly Ireland/NI/GB-based) editors who've questioned the proposed change. Almost all of whom, I note, have had their input questioned/challenged (in a way that, to my read, is at least partially covered under WP:BADGER). Guliolopez (talk) 21:27, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Guliolopez: I certainly never intended to badger anyone. Each have raised a certain point, and I simply discussed it. 〜 Festucalex • talk 03:00, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I simply don't agree with that premise or argument. To my ear and my eye, the slash/stroke separator is commonly used when referring to the topic. So much so that the punctuation/separator become a form of short-hand for the topic itself. "Stroke City". Ignoring or overriding that doesn't make sense to me. In the context of COMMONNAME and ENGVAR. As it doesn't, it seems, to the (apparently mostly Ireland/NI/GB-based) editors who've questioned the proposed change. Almost all of whom, I note, have had their input questioned/challenged (in a way that, to my read, is at least partially covered under WP:BADGER). Guliolopez (talk) 21:27, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Guliolopez: The way I see it, this would be endorsing the non-COMMON slash name, which is POV. After all, the article for the city itself isn't titled with the slash name. Neither Nationalists nor Loyalists actually use the slash name, and both object to it. A dash would put both the actual COMMONNAMEs on equal footing. 〜 Festucalex • talk 17:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I am not sure if this is helpful but I have found MOS:ENGVAR which states that although words common to all varieties of English are preferred a particular dialect of English (formal not colloquial) should be used if there are strong national ties to the topic. This is known to apply to spelling and grammar but could also potentially apply to punctuation. The use of a stroke appears to be common in both British and Hiberno English in the context of Derry/Londonderry considering it is in Northern Ireland with the county bordering the Republic of Ireland and the city being close to the border so some crossover between the two dialects can be expected. It is also worth remembering that in Hiberno English spelling is aligned with British English unlike American English. If this is helpful, this guideline appears to be in favour of continuing to use the slash. Tk420 (talk) 21:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Google Trends I have taken the liberty of performing a Google Trends comparison considering it is a recommended source for determining the most common name for a topic although it should be taken with a pinch of salt. When narrowing down to searches from the United Kingdom, I found there were actually much more searches for "Derry~Londonderry" with a tilde throughout the UK including Northern Ireland since 2004 although "Derry/Londonderry" with the stroke was still more popular in searches from NI than searches for "Derry-Londonderry" with a dash.[1] My comparison for searches from Ireland (Republic) over the same period yields similar results.[2] However, there is the possibility that "Derry~Londonderry" with a tilde could be used informally when MOS:ENGVAR says to use the formal dialect of a country (not colloquialisms). Tk420 (talk) 18:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.