The result was Procedurally closed. A spelling or naming-conventions dispute about the title of an article is not a basis for deletion. This closure is without prejudice to an AfD based on more appropriate grounds, although I note that the article has already been AfD'd once before with a Keep result. Newyorkbrad 18:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. The notability of this street in Berlin has always been marginal; it consists largely of the fact that Hitler's Chancellery used to stand there. However, the chief function of the article in Wikipedia has been, for some time, the ongoing spelling dispute: is it Vossstrasse, Voßstraße, or Voss Strasse? I propose to cut the Gordian knot.
This dispute seem to me beyond reason, and against practice; WP:MOS says, The choice between anglicized and native spellings should follow English usage (e.g., Besançon, Edvard Beneš and Göttingen, but Nuremburg, naive (not naïf), and Florence). But, above all, it is interminable.
Is this article worth the perpetual conflict? Anything which needs to be salvaged can be added to the article on the Chancellery, if it hasn't been moved to Kanzlerei. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Procedurally closed. A spelling or naming-conventions dispute about the title of an article is not a basis for deletion. This closure is without prejudice to an AfD based on more appropriate grounds, although I note that the article has already been AfD'd once before with a Keep result. Newyorkbrad 18:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. The notability of this street in Berlin has always been marginal; it consists largely of the fact that Hitler's Chancellery used to stand there. However, the chief function of the article in Wikipedia has been, for some time, the ongoing spelling dispute: is it Vossstrasse, Voßstraße, or Voss Strasse? I propose to cut the Gordian knot.
This dispute seem to me beyond reason, and against practice; WP:MOS says, The choice between anglicized and native spellings should follow English usage (e.g., Besançon, Edvard Beneš and Göttingen, but Nuremburg, naive (not naïf), and Florence). But, above all, it is interminable.
Is this article worth the perpetual conflict? Anything which needs to be salvaged can be added to the article on the Chancellery, if it hasn't been moved to Kanzlerei. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC) reply