Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2012/September
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Should XX Province be capitalised?
Posted at WT:CAPS along with note that crossposted at WT:NCGN:
- Does it vary according to country? I am getting inconsistent results for Ben Tre province/Province In ictu oculi (talk) 02:09, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- One reply came at WT:CAPS. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:57, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Is there an exception to MODERNPLACENAME - RM to consider
RE: the use of historic vs modern names. There are some places in the world that are known almost exclusively for a historical event... where there are thousands of English language sources that mention the place in an historical context, and very very few English language sources that mention it in a modern context. I am not talking about a place like Constantinople/Istanbul, Calcutta/Kolkata or Stalingrad/Volgagrad (where there are lots of English language sources that discuss the places in a modern context) I am talking about a place like Manzikert/Malazgirt (which is almost exclusively written about in the context of history).
I don't think there will be many of these situations... but I do think the few that do crop up should be exceptions to WP:MODERNPLACENAME. Looking at this in terms of the five basic principles layed out at WP:Article titles ... in these rare situations, the historic name will be far more recognizable than the modern one... the historic name will also be far more natural and consistent (since it is likely that the geo-article about the location will primarily be linked to in other articles that mention it in its historic context). I would like to explore this idea further... and to give us a test case, I have proposed the following move at RM: Malazgirt → Manzikert. Please comment there. Blueboar (talk) 16:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)