![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am removing references to "Condo". I don't think it is that common. If reinserted, please cite a source.-- A Y Arktos 11:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: article moved. Consensus is that Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Australia does not / apply here. All editors are encouraged to form a stable, consensus-backed guideline at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Clarifying the Australia section. Dabomb87 ( talk) 00:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Condobolin, New South Wales →
Condobolin — Note that
Condobolin currently redirects here. There is no need for disambiguation here.
WP:TITLE states that titles should reflect the most common, recognisable and concise name. --
Nightw
13:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
From the survey above: I should note the existence of WP:NCGN#Australia which states that most Australian populated place names are at Name, State.
There seems to be a rough consensus that this guideline should be changed, see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Clarifying the Australia section, but it is a bit rough at present. More input there would be welcome, as I think a workable consensus is at least close.
There's a good consensus that the guideline shouldn't discourage moves like the one, but exactly what it should say, and whether it should be changed immediately, are both points of contention. Andrewa ( talk) 00:47, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
More from the survey: The proposal is contrary to the Naming Convention for Australia. Andrewa claims that there is no longer consensus to support the convention. However, those proposing a change have been unable to muster a consensus to either change or scrap the convention. Until they can do so, no change should take place on individual articles, rather than the situation we currently have where somebody brings forward a proposal every two or three days. Are they intending to carry on with this until they have circumvented the convention for every single settlement in Australia? And at that point will somebody finally decide to sort out the naming convention? Skinsmoke (talk) 11:44, 22 January 2011 (UTC).
Disagree that no change should take place on individual articles. This is an important part of the process for changing guidelines. And at that point will somebody finally decide to sort out the naming convention? ASAP. Please help. Andrewa ( talk) 09:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.chinci.com/travel/pax/q/2170841/Condobolin/AU/Australia/0/#. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Dana boomer ( talk) 14:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am removing references to "Condo". I don't think it is that common. If reinserted, please cite a source.-- A Y Arktos 11:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: article moved. Consensus is that Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Australia does not / apply here. All editors are encouraged to form a stable, consensus-backed guideline at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Clarifying the Australia section. Dabomb87 ( talk) 00:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Condobolin, New South Wales →
Condobolin — Note that
Condobolin currently redirects here. There is no need for disambiguation here.
WP:TITLE states that titles should reflect the most common, recognisable and concise name. --
Nightw
13:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
From the survey above: I should note the existence of WP:NCGN#Australia which states that most Australian populated place names are at Name, State.
There seems to be a rough consensus that this guideline should be changed, see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Clarifying the Australia section, but it is a bit rough at present. More input there would be welcome, as I think a workable consensus is at least close.
There's a good consensus that the guideline shouldn't discourage moves like the one, but exactly what it should say, and whether it should be changed immediately, are both points of contention. Andrewa ( talk) 00:47, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
More from the survey: The proposal is contrary to the Naming Convention for Australia. Andrewa claims that there is no longer consensus to support the convention. However, those proposing a change have been unable to muster a consensus to either change or scrap the convention. Until they can do so, no change should take place on individual articles, rather than the situation we currently have where somebody brings forward a proposal every two or three days. Are they intending to carry on with this until they have circumvented the convention for every single settlement in Australia? And at that point will somebody finally decide to sort out the naming convention? Skinsmoke (talk) 11:44, 22 January 2011 (UTC).
Disagree that no change should take place on individual articles. This is an important part of the process for changing guidelines. And at that point will somebody finally decide to sort out the naming convention? ASAP. Please help. Andrewa ( talk) 09:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.chinci.com/travel/pax/q/2170841/Condobolin/AU/Australia/0/#. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Dana boomer ( talk) 14:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)