Talk:William Wolseley (English Army officer)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Derry[edit]

Once again I refer you to MOS:DERRY. I will even post it here.

To avoid constant renaming of articles (and more), keep a neutral point of view, promote consistency in the encyclopedia, and avoid Stroke City-style terms perplexing to those unfamiliar with the dispute, a compromise solution was proposed and agreed in 2004 regarding the Derry/Londonderry name dispute, and has been generally accepted as a convention for both article titles and in-article references since then . . . Use Derry for the city

There is no reason why this article should be excepted from this. FDW777 (talk) 20:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FDW777: Derry seems to be most applicable in a modern context: all the examples given in the MOS are to articles on contemporary aspects of the city. But this is an historical article, about a period in time when the city was effectively an English colony and was renamed Londonderry by the English. I also note the use of "generally" in the wording of MOS:DERRY leaves open room for reasoned exceptions. A compromise wording in this article might read: "...Derry, then known as Londonderry..." to make the historical context clear. Ficaia (talk) 21:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's applicable in all contexts. There's no historical exemptions, or constructions such as "Derry, then known as Londonderry". If you want to change the guideline to allow for such exemptions, thw place to do so is WT:IMOS. FDW777 (talk) 21:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The use of "generally" in the wording of the MOS at least suggests there might be exceptions. I've made my case for the historical context. Articles on the Byzantine Empire don't call Constantinople Istanbul. Londonderry is also used by the source of this article. Ficaia (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No valid reason for why this specific article should be an exemption given. Claims that the reference uses it are particularly irrelevant, since we aren't governed by the source's choice of word but our own manual of style. FDW777 (talk) 21:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@FDW777: Well clearly I think it is a valid reason. My main point is that "Londonderry" is more contextually accurate in this article. This is an historical article about a period in time when Londonderry was ruled by an English charter. I'm not trying to politicise the modern-day Derry/Londonderry debate. However, I've added the compromise language I proposed above to avoid continuing this edit war. Ficaia (talk) 21:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you think there should be historial exemptions, as said the place to propose that is WT:IMOS. If you actually understood the dispute at all, you might know the city is still called by the longer name and has never officially changed its name back to Derry, thus rendering your change absurd. FDW777 (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are no exceptions to the MOS on this issue. We use Derry for the city and Londonderry for the county. This avoids edit wars and disruptive editing. The topic of exceptions has come up in the past and always been knocked down as it can be used to worm around the naming to suit one viewpoint or another. You're welcome to take it to the talk page of the MOS at WP:IMOS and make a case for it though. However unless there's a change to the IMOS the city should only be referred to as Derry. Canterbury Tail talk 13:18, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_Wolseley_(English_Army_officer)&oldid=1205098457"