The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus, leaning towards keep Those arguing for keeping seem to have made decent arguments for why these articles are useful and encyclopedic. I don't however see anything closely resembling enough of a consensus to call this a straight keep. Also, it would be strongly appreciated if the people favoring keeping these would take steps to make sure that the relevant exonyms are sourced since presently the lists contain few or no sources. There may also be a concern about original research which should be dealt with (since this wasn't brought up much in the debate below I am not weighing it in the closing decision). JoshuaZ (talk) 01:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of European exonyms[edit]

Transwiki this page and all its subpages: Dutch exonyms, Ukrainian exonyms, etc.. Aslo scrutinize the category:Exonyms for transwiktion: A textbook case of wiktionary: nonthing but translaions of toponyms into varuious languages. `'Míkka >t 01:43, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Following the discussion below I am adding AfD notices to all subarticles. `'Míkka >t 17:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

These are the also nominated pages by country:

Votes cast before I made my all intentions clear[edit]

Delete: The page. Nothing here but a duplicate of what's already included here. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- YOu missed the major point: all its subpages which belong to wiktionary. `'Míkka >t 02:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment: It doesn't have any subpages. Are you talking about the articles that are listed within? If so, you need to make a formal AfD discussion for each, perhaps a group AfD. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete duplicative. JJL (talk) 01:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- YOu missed the major point: all its subpages which belong to wiktionary. `'Míkka >t 02:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Transwiki and delete all including the downstream pages, which all (as of this moment) lack ((afd1)) templates to make them valid nominees. Tedious but necessary for good procedural closes. --Dhartung | Talk 08:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The nom has been informed of this, and, as you know ^{(pointing out for others)} unless the AfD templates are / were added within a reasonable time from the start of this discussion, they cannot be included in this debate, although, there may be other means for deletion, such as WP:IAR or WP:SNOW. - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Further votes[edit]

Split vote: Delete this article (List of European exonyms), since we already have Category:Exonyms, and that's a better way to organize this kind of info. But Keep all the sub-articles (from Albanian exonyms, all the way to Ukrainian exonyms) as being useful, and of encyclopedic value. Turgidson (talk) 06:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- "Useful" is not an argument. A dictionary is just as useful, and word translations belong to wiktionary. `'Míkka >t 16:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- "'Comment"'. Thanks, Mikka for the explanation. Sorry, I'm not well-versed in the lingo that seems to be needed in order to defend a category or list for deletion (see the Erdős number debacle...) All I can say is that these lists of exonyms by language make sense to me, are useful, fit well in the WP project, are interesting, are good to have in this format, they make for a better encyclopedia, etc. What else do you want me to say, in order for my opinion to be considered valid, and not thrown away, as it was in the E-number Berezina (I'm using the term in the French way)? Any indication on what works and what does not around here in this kind of debates? Alas, I'm still totally mystified. Turgidson (talk) 01:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Split vote as per Turgidson - delete List of European exonyms because Category:Exonyms exists; keep linked articles such as Albanian exonyms etc. Gandalf61 (talk) 11:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with Turgidson and Gandalf61 - same split vote; these lists of exonyms by language make sense to me, are useful, fit well in the WP project, are interesting, are good to have in this format, they make for a better encyclopedia, etc. Wiktionary doesn't offer exonym lists of this type, right? Gestumblindi (talk) 21:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tikiwont 10:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Keep all Since we're apparently still debating this, one of the things that Wikipedia excels at is being a reference work that contains more than a paper encylopedia could. The topic of exonyms is encyclopedic, but the limitations of space, and the need to conserve that space to foreign languages that we Americans consider the most popular (Spanish, French, German, in that order) has hitherto prevented something of this nature. I recognize, of course, that most people won't care about what comes from Albania-- who gives a shit about some Balkan third-world like Albania, right? True of the rest of these dinky little countries too, so delete all those litss, right? But one of Wikipedia's assets is its global view. The average American kid may find summaries of "Charmed" episodes to be more relevant than boring old exonyms, but Wikipedia is, first and foremost, a reference. Mandsford 13:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment. Well said, Mandsford. I'll second that. Turgidson 13:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete all. To me, this seems to be an absolutely unmaintainable collection of lists. Note that there are several regions in Europe with more than one official language, either now or in history; just think of the Province of Bolzano-Bozen where probably every village (and city quarter, etc.) has both an Italian and a German name. Not to speak of locations in Poland, Belgium, etc. If someone wants to add these to Wiktionary - OK, userfy the pages, but I don't see how these lists can be properly maintained with reasonable effort. The translations are better added to the appropriate articles about the cities. And the information can also easily be found there. --B. Wolterding 16:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My opinion has not changed. Why discuss this again? I still think that the article List of European exonyms can be deleted but the individual lists should be kept for the reasons outlined above. And to reiterate my question: if you are specifically looking e.g. for Icelandic exonyms (but not for a particular one), is there a way to do so in Wiktionary? Also, your suggestion "The translations are better added to the appropriate articles about the cities" doesn't really work - I have seen exonyms deleted from articles about cites/countries because they weren't considered relevant, e.g. the Icelandic exonym Svartfjallaland for Montenegro. Gestumblindi 20:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent point, Gestumblindi. And, before anyone says, "who cares," let be bring another example: As this page tells us, the Romanian exonym for Leipzig is Lipsca, which of course is not mentioned in the Leipzig article. But this is mentioned in the article on Lipscani -- an important commercial street in central Bucharest, whose name comes from Lipsca. Also the exonym for Konstanz is Constanţa (same as the name of a port city on the shores of the Black Sea), and sure enough, you won't find that kind of info in either article. I could go on and on, but let me stop here. Once again, good call. Turgidson 20:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just another nugget that came to mind while discussing this topic: as mentioned in the Dinicu Golescu article, the first Romanian-language newspaper to be published outside the country (in 1827) was "Fama Lipschii pentru Daţia" ("The Fame of Leipzig for Dacia"). So, even if an exonym like Lipsca is more-or-less obsolete, it lives on (like the Cheshire Cat's grin?) in various forms or guises. To lose this kind of info would be a pity, methinks — a bit like seeing an endangered species going extinct (sorry if I sound too corny). Turgidson (talk) 18:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Keep all - Articles like this are extremely useful, and I see absolutely no harm in it being kept. Is Wikipedia limited on space? No. Is the subject notable? Yes. I agree with the comments of Gestumblindi and Turgidson... it would be extremely difficult to find these if they were transwikied. The obscurity and rarity of the subject itself is also another reason for keeping. I think it would be a shame to see this articles go... and it would be foolish of Wikipedia to allow them to disappear. Max Naylor (talk) 17:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
8It will not be difficult, see my "suggestion" below. Mukadderat (talk) 20:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Strong Keep all exonymy is part of toponymy and history and is encyclopedic. WP:NOT#PAPER, nearly all other large Wikipedias in other language have these so apparently the notion that this is encyclopedic and notable is widespread. Google scholar has over 300 hits for "exonyms OR exonym OR exonymy" so scholars seem to think it's worthwhile. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- I didn't see such lists in any large encyclopedia. And we are not discussing to delete the exonym article.Mukadderat (talk) 20:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  - Right, WP:NOT#PAPER, you wouldn't see any television episodes, individual songs, albums, small towns, or any high schools in any other large encyclopedias, but they are here and that's the beauty of WP. :-) Carlossuarez46 (talk) 15:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
delete all. This articles are not about an encyclopedic topic "exonym". This is an infinite list of exonyms. We don't have List of synonyms, List of antonyms, etc., Such things are normally looked for in dictionaries, not in ncyclopedias, in our case we have wiktionary. Mukadderat (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Suggestion. I understand that, unlike simply words, place names in foreign languages are of special interest. I suggest to add into corresponding geographical infoboxes a link to the wiktionary entry, where names in all languages may be listed. Mukadderat (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This wouldn't help me find e.g. specifically Icelandic exonyms or Romanian exonyms, in this way I would only find exonyms in many languages for a given place. But I am interested in e.g. a list of Icelandic exonyms. Gestumblindi (talk) 01:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Huh? Just take e.g English-Iselandic dictionary. You must certainly find Washington in Iselandic there. But if you want Az-Zawiyyah in Icelandic, I highly doubt you will find a reliable ref for inclusion it into wikipedia. Also, I don't quite understand why this exotic request must be catered by wikipedia. I am very curious to find names of all carpenter tools in Vietnamese. Shall we create List of names of freshwater fish in Ngongombongo language? `'Míkka >t 01:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This rhetorical question sounds like a red herring to me. :) Turgidson (talk) 19:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment It also occurred to me that we have a major verifiability problem with these lists as well. `'Míkka >t 01:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I may be able to find individual Icelandic exonyms in an English-Icelandic dictionary - but not a list of exonyms. I would have to look up each city individually. The list here is a much quicker and more comfortable way if I want to know what the Icelandic exonyms for well-known places around the world are. Also, I do not think that the request is particularly exotic. For a start, the mere existence of all those exonym lists from Albanian to Ukrainian, over time edited by lots of contributors, proves that it is something of interest to many - unlike your hypothetical "names of all carpenter tools" or "names of freshwater fish in Ngongombongo language". Of course there are many places without any well-known exonym in a particular language and therefore I don't understand why you refer to "Az-Zawiyyah in Icelandic" - well, there is no Icelandic exonym for Az-Zawiyyah, I suppose, and that's it. A "major verifiability problem" I can't see - as you said, you will find the exonyms in dictionaries. The list of Icelandic exnonyms, for instance, was checked using dictionaries not long ago. Gestumblindi (talk) 17:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Strong keep. Lists are distinct from both categories and articles and have an important part to play in the project - see WP:LIST and WP:CLS. If these were purporting to be articles they would be far substandard, but as lists (and clearly headed as such) they are an extremely useful part of the cross-referencing para-structure of the encyclopedia as a whole. This is especially true of Central and Eastern Europe, where German was once a lingua franca and where borders have been so often changed. --Paularblaster (talk) 14:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.