Requested move edit

Bac Ninh provinceBac Ninh Province – Revert capitalization to pre-Kauffner status and current consensus. NVanMinh (talk) 17:44, 16 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Move discussion in progress edit

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:An Giang province which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 00:59, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Making Vietnam province naming consistent edit

Requested move edit

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 10:33, 13 July 2013 (UTC)Reply


– Out of the 56 provinces of Vietnam, all but these have full diacritics in their article title. These moves remedy that discrepancy (plus fixing one instance of a lowercase 'p' that should be uppercase). I proposed these moves several days ago here at Wikipedia:WikiProject Vietnam and there have been no objections. Colonies Chris (talk) 21:29, 5 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Survey edit

  • Oppose. The purpose of a title is to inform the reader, the tell him the common name of a subject as it actually exists in the English language, not to propose original Viet-lish constructions.
  • For determining a geographic name, we "consult English-language encyclopedias [including] Encyclopædia Britannica, Columbia Encyclopedia, Encarta," per WP:WIAN. No major encyclopedia uses Vietnamese diacritics. See Britannica, Columbia, Encarta, and World Factbook.
  • "Follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language", per WP:DIACRITICS. On GBooks, there are zero post-1980 English-language results for "Tây Ninh Province" -llc, three for "Tay Ninh Province" -llc.
  • In the case of English-language news sites based in Vietnam, there is no technical barrier that would prevent them from using diacritics, yet none of them do. See VOV Online, Viet Nam News, Thanh Nien, VGP News, and VietnamNet. A few years ago, VNN and VGP were both using diacritics in their English-language copy, but this is no longer the case. Kauffner (talk) 23:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support per
  • (1) WP:BRD (some of these are undiscussed move/db6 moves by User:Kauffner)
  • (2) per all previous Vietnam geo restore RMs (too many to mention but the keynote are the three repeat RMs at Talk:Cà Mau)
  • (3) per recent RfC majority (exact result count disputed, either 23:16 with canvassed !votes or 23:10 excluding)
  • (4) per minority but gradually increasing use of Vietnamese fonts in specialist sources - Oxford, Hawaii and Harvard, admittedly not yet National Geographic - which does not have the editor resources of en.wp.
  • (5) per WP:AT "Consistency – The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles." as ColoniesChris' nom consistency with Category:Provinces of Vietnam
  • (6) per how we treat white countries if that sounds pointy, it is, it's a rephrase of a point left on my Talk page today by a vi.wp editor about Morača - but the point is undeniably true when we accept Icelandic, Maltese and Latvian [Latin-alphabet] place names with exotic diacritics why are we singling out one [Latin-alphabet] nation, Vietnam? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • It's nice to know that getting back at me is IIO's official, No. 1 reason for supporting this proposal. No. 6 is an interesting one as well. Next, we'll be hearing about how Chinese, Greek, Arabic, or hieroglyphics are "singled out". This type thinking ignores the whole point of writing, which is to communicate to the reader. We should be following the professionals like Britannica or National Geographic, not reviving an idea the Vietnamese media has abandoned. Kauffner (talk) 04:35, 6 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
Kauffner, WP:BRD if applicable is normally No.1 issue to mention in any RM. and comparing Vietnamese Latin alphabet to hieroglyphics is an example of (6) In ictu oculi (talk) 05:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
BRD is about reverting edits. It actually says, "Note that BRD does not work for moving articles (changing their titles)". However one interprets BRD, you mentioned me by name. Kauffner (talk) 06:32, 6 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support. Wikipedia typically does not strip diacritics from placenames (e.g., Călărași County, Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship) unless the name in question is an exonym (e.g., Munich for München). —  AjaxSmack  03:49, 7 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support. Like mentioned, the rest of the provinces have diacritics, and there is nothing immediately wrong that could prevent standardizing these articles to match the others. BML0309 21:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • SupportIn line with recent RM outcomes and related discussions. Agathoclea (talk) 09:43, 10 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support per In ictu oculi and its inline with other recent RMs. -DJSasso (talk) 13:58, 10 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support for consistency and propery format. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:20, 10 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support – Kauffner should stop getting rid of important diacritics from names that are not commonly known in English. Dicklyon (talk) 15:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support – We Wikipedia to keep any diacritics when using foreign words from a language written in the Latin alphabet. ༆ (talk) 20:48, 10 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • support per consensus at other rms. I havent checked sourcing on these to be honest, but consistency is worth a bit more than commonname since vn provinces are not well known in english like hanoi or saigon.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 05:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

-- this is a bit late to mention it, but there is another RM, various foods and card games, at Talk:Bun rieu. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:27, 11 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bắc Ninh Province. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:19, 28 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bắc Ninh Province. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:53, 9 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:06, 8 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply