![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on July 6, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
As per Germany Wikipedia, which has no separate article on Voßstraße, I suggest to merge the content to Wilhelmstraße, Reich Chancellery, Topography of Terror or other articles, redirect, and call it quits here. -- Matthead discuß! O 09:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
It is a legitimate article - I don't think it should be merged and/or redirected. There are people here who have no cultural awareness and, nonetheless, don't wish to recognize the character. "sss" is an improper translation - and there is no harm using the character, as the turks do with their names, and the spanish do with theirs, and the portugese, etc, etc, etc. Rarelibra 23:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I can choose to say, "Mary, Tom & I" or I can say, "Mary, Tom and I". Neither is correct or incorrect; it's just a matter of whatever I feel like typing. Isn't that same true for the ß symbol? - Theaveng ( talk) 15:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
-- 46.115.22.103 ( talk) 01:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I see by the edit history that writing in English on this English Wikipedia is described as inaccuracy. The way to deal with such complaints should be to add a tag, and discuss here. I await the discussion with some interest. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Just some hints about the ß/ss-thing, followed by my own opinion:
Thus, a street is "Straße" in, e.g., Austria and Germany, and "Strasse" in Switzerland.
Given this, the fact that many english readers don't know how to pronounce a "ß", and comparing the 1,170 hits from
vossstrasse -vossstraße -voßstrasse -voßstraße -wikipedia
with the 1,090 hits from
voßstraße -vossstraße -voßstrasse -vossstrasse -wikipedia
I think "Vossstrasse" should be used in the Englisch Wikipedia.see my contribution below--
Cyfal (
talk)
20:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
-- Cyfal ( talk) 20:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Since Voßstraße is the correct spelling, I strongly suggest to use it as the page title. Since Vossstrasse is the officially correct substitute today, I suggest make it a redirect to Voßstraße. Since Vosstrasse was the officially correct substitute spelling for centuries, and is the most widely used and accepted substitute of today, and is likely to be found in literature for the next century or so, I suggest to let it redirect to Voßstraße. -- Purodha Blissenbach ( talk) 18:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Jesus! Why can´t you at least agree on one (!) spelling then (even the wrong one for that matter!)?: Voss Strasse, Voß Straße, Vossstrasse, Voß Strasse and many more (wrong!) combinations of the streetname can be found in the article...That´s ridiculous and a disgrace. If you state at the beginning that the German letter ß is used in the text why not use it coherently then? The name of the street is "Voßstraße" (look at the streetsign!) - very simple: One word (oh yes, there is a rule for it in German whether it should be one word or two..) and "ß" in Voß (Name of the guy) and in Straße for street. What a stupid argument that Anglophones in general might mistake it for a b or that some dumbheads don´t know how to handle a keyboard with foreign fonts. Is that the British/American idea of an educated nation?! What about the Spanish ñ or ll (which is not a double L but a J), all the German Umlaute like ä,ö,ü, or many other letters that the English language simply doesn´t know? I find it hard to believe that there is actually an argument about the question how something should be spelled properly in the 21st century (with the true information easily accessible) if there is so much clear evidence about the correct way (and that is correct in England as much as it is correct in Germany or Timbuktu). As a German who spent many years in England I find that the whole argument reveals a (for me) very typical British/American almost imperialistic arrogance and lack of respect when it comes to foreign languages. (Visible in both pronunciation nd spelling.) It´s not the "German government" which wants to "determine what correct English is". But if we turn the argument around: Who are the Anglophones to disfigure Names and words in other languages? So please: At least be consistent: Stick to one "Anglo-German" spelling (wether it be Straße or Strasse, Voß or Voss). And if you decide that one can´t expect an Anglophone to understand the concept of different and more letters than the ones he knows from English then forget about the hint "The title of this article contains the character ß." The present orthographic chaos is a complete farce-- 92.225.84.92 ( talk) 12:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no consensus.-- Yannismarou ( talk) 20:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
In case already an established english spelling variant exists, I think we should use this one. (That's not only my own opinion but also seems to be consens on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Use English.) I've now checked the online accessible references in this article: Its mostly spelled "Voss Strasse". (Perhaps someone should check the newspapers and books cited, too.) Thus, I now suggest to move the article to "Voss Strasse". -- Cyfal ( talk) 20:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
As said in section "Merge and Redirect" above, there's no need to keep this as a separate article as its title is subject to endless discussions about spelling variants. It even had been created to make a point about English spelling. I would have merged it long time ago, but hesitated due to the discussions and strong oppinions shown here, and due to the fact that the use of ß remains a matter of controversy anyway. -- Matthead Discuß 10:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The Gilbert and Hoffman books in the footnotes divide one each between Vossstrasse and Voss Strasse. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Just in case anyone wasn't aware, the "debate" over the article title was mentioned last year in Der Spiegel, and can be read here: [1]. ProhibitOnions (T) 12:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
The widespread story that the walls in the Mohrenstr. Underground station were faced with red marble slabs from the Reichskanzlei after the war is disputed, for example by geologists at TU Berlin, who have studied the matter and consulted expert masons. They could not have been salvaged from the ruin in a way that would have permitted their reuse for such a purpose. At best perhaps a storage depot containing these slabs (leftovers kept in case needed for repairs) somewhere could have survived the bombing et al. and been used. But there seems to be no evidence of such a store or its location or the subsequent use of anything it may have contained. The article "Mohrenstraße (Berlin U-Bahn") denies the rumor and cites evidence for the GDR source for the marble used. Unless anybody has strong objections, I would like to soften the assertion in the article a bit. Any opinions? -- Remotelysensed ( talk) 09:27, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on July 6, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
As per Germany Wikipedia, which has no separate article on Voßstraße, I suggest to merge the content to Wilhelmstraße, Reich Chancellery, Topography of Terror or other articles, redirect, and call it quits here. -- Matthead discuß! O 09:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
It is a legitimate article - I don't think it should be merged and/or redirected. There are people here who have no cultural awareness and, nonetheless, don't wish to recognize the character. "sss" is an improper translation - and there is no harm using the character, as the turks do with their names, and the spanish do with theirs, and the portugese, etc, etc, etc. Rarelibra 23:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I can choose to say, "Mary, Tom & I" or I can say, "Mary, Tom and I". Neither is correct or incorrect; it's just a matter of whatever I feel like typing. Isn't that same true for the ß symbol? - Theaveng ( talk) 15:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
-- 46.115.22.103 ( talk) 01:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I see by the edit history that writing in English on this English Wikipedia is described as inaccuracy. The way to deal with such complaints should be to add a tag, and discuss here. I await the discussion with some interest. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Just some hints about the ß/ss-thing, followed by my own opinion:
Thus, a street is "Straße" in, e.g., Austria and Germany, and "Strasse" in Switzerland.
Given this, the fact that many english readers don't know how to pronounce a "ß", and comparing the 1,170 hits from
vossstrasse -vossstraße -voßstrasse -voßstraße -wikipedia
with the 1,090 hits from
voßstraße -vossstraße -voßstrasse -vossstrasse -wikipedia
I think "Vossstrasse" should be used in the Englisch Wikipedia.see my contribution below--
Cyfal (
talk)
20:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
-- Cyfal ( talk) 20:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Since Voßstraße is the correct spelling, I strongly suggest to use it as the page title. Since Vossstrasse is the officially correct substitute today, I suggest make it a redirect to Voßstraße. Since Vosstrasse was the officially correct substitute spelling for centuries, and is the most widely used and accepted substitute of today, and is likely to be found in literature for the next century or so, I suggest to let it redirect to Voßstraße. -- Purodha Blissenbach ( talk) 18:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Jesus! Why can´t you at least agree on one (!) spelling then (even the wrong one for that matter!)?: Voss Strasse, Voß Straße, Vossstrasse, Voß Strasse and many more (wrong!) combinations of the streetname can be found in the article...That´s ridiculous and a disgrace. If you state at the beginning that the German letter ß is used in the text why not use it coherently then? The name of the street is "Voßstraße" (look at the streetsign!) - very simple: One word (oh yes, there is a rule for it in German whether it should be one word or two..) and "ß" in Voß (Name of the guy) and in Straße for street. What a stupid argument that Anglophones in general might mistake it for a b or that some dumbheads don´t know how to handle a keyboard with foreign fonts. Is that the British/American idea of an educated nation?! What about the Spanish ñ or ll (which is not a double L but a J), all the German Umlaute like ä,ö,ü, or many other letters that the English language simply doesn´t know? I find it hard to believe that there is actually an argument about the question how something should be spelled properly in the 21st century (with the true information easily accessible) if there is so much clear evidence about the correct way (and that is correct in England as much as it is correct in Germany or Timbuktu). As a German who spent many years in England I find that the whole argument reveals a (for me) very typical British/American almost imperialistic arrogance and lack of respect when it comes to foreign languages. (Visible in both pronunciation nd spelling.) It´s not the "German government" which wants to "determine what correct English is". But if we turn the argument around: Who are the Anglophones to disfigure Names and words in other languages? So please: At least be consistent: Stick to one "Anglo-German" spelling (wether it be Straße or Strasse, Voß or Voss). And if you decide that one can´t expect an Anglophone to understand the concept of different and more letters than the ones he knows from English then forget about the hint "The title of this article contains the character ß." The present orthographic chaos is a complete farce-- 92.225.84.92 ( talk) 12:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no consensus.-- Yannismarou ( talk) 20:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
In case already an established english spelling variant exists, I think we should use this one. (That's not only my own opinion but also seems to be consens on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Use English.) I've now checked the online accessible references in this article: Its mostly spelled "Voss Strasse". (Perhaps someone should check the newspapers and books cited, too.) Thus, I now suggest to move the article to "Voss Strasse". -- Cyfal ( talk) 20:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
As said in section "Merge and Redirect" above, there's no need to keep this as a separate article as its title is subject to endless discussions about spelling variants. It even had been created to make a point about English spelling. I would have merged it long time ago, but hesitated due to the discussions and strong oppinions shown here, and due to the fact that the use of ß remains a matter of controversy anyway. -- Matthead Discuß 10:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The Gilbert and Hoffman books in the footnotes divide one each between Vossstrasse and Voss Strasse. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Just in case anyone wasn't aware, the "debate" over the article title was mentioned last year in Der Spiegel, and can be read here: [1]. ProhibitOnions (T) 12:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
The widespread story that the walls in the Mohrenstr. Underground station were faced with red marble slabs from the Reichskanzlei after the war is disputed, for example by geologists at TU Berlin, who have studied the matter and consulted expert masons. They could not have been salvaged from the ruin in a way that would have permitted their reuse for such a purpose. At best perhaps a storage depot containing these slabs (leftovers kept in case needed for repairs) somewhere could have survived the bombing et al. and been used. But there seems to be no evidence of such a store or its location or the subsequent use of anything it may have contained. The article "Mohrenstraße (Berlin U-Bahn") denies the rumor and cites evidence for the GDR source for the marble used. Unless anybody has strong objections, I would like to soften the assertion in the article a bit. Any opinions? -- Remotelysensed ( talk) 09:27, 3 June 2015 (UTC)