Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:21, 19 May 2011

This guideline documents an English Misplaced Pages naming convention. Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page.

Shortcuts WP:NCGN WP:PLACE

This page in a nutshell: Use modern English names for titles and in articles. Historical names or names in other languages can be used in the lead if they are frequently used and important enough to be valuable to readers, and should be used in articles with caution.

This page describes conventions for determining the titles of Misplaced Pages articles on places and for the use of place names in Misplaced Pages articles. Our article title policy provides that article titles should be chosen for the general reader, not for specialists. By following modern English usage, we also avoid arguments about what a place ought to be called, instead asking the less contentious question, what it is called.

Consensus

The Misplaced Pages community has found it difficult to reach consensus, its preferred mode of dispute resolution, in several geographic naming debates. Two significant conflicts have been brought to Misplaced Pages's Arbitration Commitee: the distinction between Ireland as an island and the Republic of Ireland and the distinction between the country which describes itself as the Republic of Macedonia and the various other uses of Macedonia . Other long-standing problems have been settled through compromise or voting.

General guidelines

These are advice, intended to guide, not force, consensus; but they are the consensus of actual experience in move discussions.

1. The title: When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it. This often will be a local name, or one of them; but not always. If the place does not exist anymore, or the article deals only with a place in a period when it held a different name, the widely accepted historical English name should be used. If neither of these English names exist, the modern official name, in articles dealing with the present, or the modern local historical name, in articles dealing with a specific period, should be used. All applicable names can be used in the titles of redirects.
2. The lead: The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parentheses, eg: Gulf of Finland ( Template:Lang-et; Template:Lang-fi; Template:Lang-ru; Template:Lang-sv) is a large bay in the easternmost arm of the Baltic Sea.
   • Any archaic names in the list (including names used before the standardization of English orthography) should be clearly marked as such, i.e., (archaic: name1).
   • Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages, i.e., (Template:Lang-fi; Template:Lang-ru; Template:Lang-sv; Template:Lang-et). or (ar: name1, be: name2, cs: name3). As an exception to alphabetical order, the local official name should be listed before other alternate names if it differs from a widely accepted English name.
   • Alternatively, all alternative names can be moved to and explained in a "Names" or "Etymology" section immediately following the lead, or a special paragraph of the lead; we recommend that this be done if there are at least three alternate names, or there is something notable about the names themselves.
     • In this case, the redundant list of the names in the article's first line should be replaced by a link to the section phrased, for example: "(known also by several ])". When there are several significant alternate names, the case for mentioning the names prominently is at least as strong as with two.
       
     • Once such a section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line. As an exception, a local official name different from a widely accepted English name should be retained in the lead "(Foreign language: Local name; known also by several alternative names)".
   • Infoboxes should generally be headed with the article title, and include these alternate names. The formal version of a name (Republic of Montenegro at Montenegro for a header) can be substituted for it; extensive historic names are often better in a second infobox, as at Augsburg.
3. The contents (this applies to all articles using the name in question): The same name as in the title should be used consistently throughout the article, unless there is a widely accepted historic English name for a specific historical context. In cases when a widely accepted historic English name is used, it should be followed by the modern English name in parentheses on the first occurrence of the name in applicable sections of the article in the format: "historical name (modern name)." This resembles linking; it should not be done to the detriment of style. On the other hand, it is probably better to do too often than too rarely. If more than one historic name is applicable for a given historical context, the other names should be added after the modern English name, i.e.: "historical name (English name, other historical names)".
   • Use of widely accepted historic names implies that names can change; we use Byzantium, Constantinople and Istanbul in discussing the same city in different periods. Use of one name for a town in 2000 does not determine what name we should give the same town in 1900 or in 1400, nor the other way around. Many towns, however, should keep the same name; it is a question of fact, of actual English usage, in all cases. For more examples, some of them involving changes within the twentieth century, see below.
4. This page is a guideline; it is not intended to overrule all other guidelines.
   • Where, as with Lyon, different national varieties of the English language spell a foreign name differently, we should also consider our guidance on national varieties of English, which would have articles in British English call the city Lyons, articles in American English Lyon, and the article itself use either, consistently. Articles should not be moved from one national variety to the other without good reasons; our principle of most common name does not mean "use American, because there are more Americans in the English speaking world." On the other hand, especially when local usage is itself divided, we do not always follow a mere plurality of local English usage against the rest of the English-speaking world: Ganges, not Ganga.

Emphasis

It is Misplaced Pages convention to emphasize alternate names at first use, normally in the first line. It is customary to bold the article title name, and its frequently used English-language synonyms, and to italicize foreign or historic names represented in Roman script. (It is technically possible to bold or italicize Greek or Cyrillic names; but there is consensus not to do so, because they are distinguishable from running text anyway.) If this produces a garish first paragraph, consider moving the discussion of names to a separate section, or deemphasizing some of them.

Names not in Roman script should be transliterated (in italics). If there are multiple frequently used transliterations (again, used by at least 10% of the English sources), include them.

Use English

When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it. This will often be identical in form to the local name (as with Paris or Berlin), but in many cases it will differ (Germany rather than Deutschland, Rome rather than Roma, Hanover rather than Hannover, Meissen rather than Meißen). If a native name is more often used in English sources than a corresponding traditional English name, then use the native name. An example is Livorno, which is now known more widely under its native name than under the traditional English name "Leghorn".

If no name can be shown to be widely accepted in English, use the local name. If more than one local name exists, follow the procedure explained below under Multiple local names.

If the place does not exist any more, or the article deals only with a place in a period when it held a different name, the widely accepted historical English name should be used. If there is no such name in English, use the historical name that is now used locally - for more, see Use modern names, below.

Other applicable names can be used in the titles of redirects. They may also appear in the lead paragraph or in a special section of the article, in accordance with the advice given in the lead section guideline. For use of names in infoboxes, see the infobox guideline.

Within articles, places should generally be referred to by the same name as is used in their article title, or a historic name when discussing a past period. Use of one name for a town in 2000 does not determine what name we should give the same town in 1900 or in 1400, nor the other way around. Many towns, however, should keep the same name; it is a question of fact, of actual English usage, in all cases. For example, when discussing the city now called Istanbul, Misplaced Pages uses Byzantium in ancient Greece, and Constantinople for the capital of the Byzantine Empire, and also the Ottoman Empire. Similarly, use Stalingrad when discussing the city now called Volgograd in the context of World War II. For more details on this subject see Misplaced Pages:Proper names.

Widely accepted name

A name can be considered as widely accepted if a neutral and reliable source states: "X is the name most often used for this entity". Without such an assertion, the following methods (not listed in any particular order) may be helpful in establishing a widely accepted name (period will be the modern era for current names; the relevant historical period for historical names):

1. Consult English-language encyclopedias (we recommend Encyclopedia Britannica, Columbia Encyclopedia, Encarta, each as published after 1993). If the articles in these agree on using a single name in discussing the period, it is the widely accepted English name.
   • One reason for 1993 is to ensure that post-Cold War changes in usage are duly reflected; other (especially later) limiting dates may be appropriate in some parts of the world.
2. Consult Google Scholar and Google Books hits (count only articles and books, not number of times the word is used in them) when searched over English language articles and books where the corresponding location is mentioned in relation to the period in question. If the name of the location coincides with the name of another entity, care should be taken to exclude inappropriate pages from the count. If the name is used at least three times as often as any other, in referring to the period, it is widely accepted.
   • Always look at search results, don't just count them. For more, see the section on search engines below.
3. Consult other standard histories and scientific studies of the area in question. (We recommend the Cambridge Histories; the Library of Congress country studies; Library of Congress Subject Headings; and the Oxford dictionaries relevant to the period and country involved). If they agree, the name is widely accepted. The possibility that some standard histories will be dated, or written by a non-native speaker of English, should be allowed for.
4. Consult major news sources, either individually, or by using Lexis-Nexis, if accessible. If they agree in using a given name, it is widely accepted.
5. Enter the proposed move at WP:RM. If it is the consensus that a given name is the English name, then it is presumably widely accepted.
6. If a name is used in translating or explaining the official name, especially in texts addressed to an English-speaking audience, it is probably widely accepted.

Some names will be widely accepted, but not quite meet any of these tests; they are phrased to ensure that no name not widely accepted will pass. These should be decided case by case, on the evidence of the substantial body of data accumulated in the tests above. Names which fail each by a small margin or single exception are probably widely accepted.

When considering a source in determining English usage, remember the purpose of the source. When a guidebook or roadmap written in English shows an autobahn between München and Nürnberg, it is attesting to local usage, because that is what the signs on the autobahn will say; Munich and Nuremberg are still the English names. Similarly, a town's own website may well attest to an official name, even when this differs from local usage and widespread English usage.

The reliability and the fluency of sources allegedly in English may reasonably be considered; a text which reads like it has been produced by Babelfish probably has been, and such sources are unlikely to represent English usage.

BGN

The United States Board on Geographic Names determines official Federal nomenclature for the United States. Most often, actual American usage follows it, even in such points as the omission of apostrophes, as in St. Marys River. However, if colloquial usage does differ, we should prefer actual American usage to the official name. Similarly, its GEOnet server normally presents local official usage in the country concerned (for example, Frankfurt am Main); in a handful of cases, like Florence, it has a conventional name field. Its BGN Approved is a systematic transliteration, as Moskva — Misplaced Pages prefers Moscow, which is also the BGN conventional name. Where it acknowledges a conventional name, it is evidence of widespread English usage; where it does not, it is not addressing our primary question.

Search engine issues

Search engine tests should be used with care: in testing whether a name is widely accepted English usage, we are interested in hits which are in English, represent English usage, mean the place in question, and are not duplicates of each other or of Misplaced Pages. Search engine results can fail on all of these.

Google gives unreliable result estimates at the onset of a search; the number of results shown in the final page should be used whenever feasible. It does not return more than 1,000 actual results; hit counts above this are estimates which cannot be examined, and are weak evidence of actual usage. Adding addtional search terms may reduce the number of hits to this range, but adds additional random variance.

• Failure to be English sources:
  • Language-filtered searches include works that contain only brief English sections. These sections may not discuss the place name in question.
  • Search engines will find hits when a paper in English is quoting foreign text, which may well include foreign placenames. This often occurs when citing a paper by title. For example, hits which are in fact citations of German papers which use Riesengebirge are not evidence of English usage, either way.
• Failure to be English usage:
  • Google Scholar will frequently return post office addresses, especially for modern university towns. This attests to local usage, not to English usage (except of course for towns in the English-speaking world, for which local usage should prevail).
  • Search engines do not normally distinguish consistent use of a name from a single mention. Any good history of Venice will mention Venezia at least once; any good history of Bratislava will mention Pressburg. But what we want is the word they consistently use to refer to the city; it is very difficult to find that with a search engine, especially when the question is: does the source call nineteenth- or eighteenth-century Bratislava something different?
    • For example, hits which are of the form "X (Foolanguage Y)" attest to English usage of X, and Foolanguage usage of Y. The latter matters to the Foolanguage Misplaced Pages, not to us.
  • Please remember that Google Scholar and Google Books are imperfectly random selections out of the whole corpus of English writing. If the results could easily have arisen by chance (for example, if there are only half-a-dozen or so valid hits on all the alternatives combined), this is not a good indicator of widespread English usage.
    
• Failure to be about the place under discussion:
  • Many names are used for several places, often several places of the same type. In addition, many placenames have become surnames, and papers which are by authors with those surnames do not establish English usage for the placename.
• Failure to represent independent usage of the name:
  • Some websites mechanically copy and compile other websites, including Misplaced Pages itself. These should not be counted as separate instances of English usage, but as the same instance duplicated. Misplaced Pages mirrors and forks, which may also appear in Google Book or Google Scholar searches, are unacceptable sources. When using Google search results as a usage metric, always include "-wikipedia" in the search conditions. This will exclude some, although not all, Misplaced Pages mirrors.

Some of these problems will be lessened if the search includes an English word, like "city" or "river", as well as the placename. (If this is done with one proposed placename, it must of course be done for all competing proposals.) Another approach is to examine the first few pages of hits, and see what proportion of them are false hits. But the only certain control is to count how many hits are genuinely in English, assert English usage, and deal with the place discussed.

Another useful idea, especially when one name seems to be used often in the construct "X (also called Y)" in sources that consistently use X thereafter, is to search for "and X" against "and Y" (or "in X" versus "in Y") to see which is common in running prose.

Multiple local names

There are cases in which the local authority recognizes equally two or more names from different languages, but English discussion of the place is so limited that none of the above tests indicate which of them is widely used in English; so there is no single local name, and English usage is hard to determine.

Experience shows that the straightforward solution of a double or triple name is often unsatisfactory; there are all too many complaints that one or the other name should be first. We also deprecate any discussion of which name the place ought to have.

We recommend choosing a single name, by some objective criterion, even a somewhat arbitrary one. Simple Google tests are acceptable to settle the matter, despite their problems; one solution is to follow English usage where it can be determined, and to adopt the name used by the linguistic majority where English usage is indecisive. This has been done, for example, with the communes of South Tyrol, based on an officially published linguistic survey of the area (see Italy below).

In some cases, a compromise is reached between editors to avoid giving the impression of support for a particular national point of view. For example, the name Liancourt Rocks has been adopted rather than select either the Korean or Japanese name for the feature. Similarly, Misplaced Pages's version of the Derry/Londonderry name dispute has been resolved by naming the city page Derry and the county page County Londonderry.

There are occasional exceptions, such as Biel/Bienne, when the double name is the overwhelmingly most common name in English (in this case, it has become most common because it is official and customary in Switzerland; the usage does not appear to be controversial). This should not be done to settle a dispute between national or linguistic points of view; it should only be done when the double name is actually what English-speakers call the place.

Use modern names

For an article about a place whose name has changed over time, context is important. For articles discussing the present, use the modern English name (or local name, if there is no established English name), rather than an older one. Older names should be used in appropriate historical contexts when a substantial majority of reliable modern sources does the same; this includes the names of articles relating to particular historical periods. Names have changed both because cities have been formally renamed and because cities have been taken from one state by another; in both cases, however, we are interested in what reliable English-language sources now use.

For example, we have articles called Istanbul, Dubrovnik, Volgograd and Saint Petersburg, these being the modern names of these cities, although former names (Constantinople, Ragusa, Stalingrad or Leningrad) are also used when referring to appropriate historical periods (if any), including such article names as Battle of Stalingrad and Sieges of Constantinople; not to mention separate articles on Constantinople and Byzantium on the historic cities on the site of modern Istanbul - or part of it. It is sometimes common practice in English to use name forms from different languages to indicate cultural or political dominance. For example, Szczecin is often written as Stettin (the German name) for the period before 1945, likewise Gdańsk is called Danzig (the detailed decisions at Talk:Gdansk/Vote apply to that dispute; they are older than this page). There are other cities for which policy is still debated, such as Vilnius, which in various contexts is referred to as Vilnius, Wilno or Vilna.

In some cases it is not the local name but the spelling of the name in English that has changed over time. For example, Nanjing, as the contemporary pinyin spelling, is used for the name of the article rather than Nanking. However, the article on the Treaty of Nanking spells the city as was customary in 1842, because modern English scholarship still does.

Another example is Mumbai, which officially changed its name from Bombay in 1995. Our choice of name does not automatically follow the official one, however, but depends on two claims: that usage in English by locals (and now wider English usage as well) has changed to commonly use Mumbai, although many local institutions do not, and that Indian English, as an official language, should be followed, in accordance with our guidelines on National varieties of English.

Alternate names

Misplaced Pages articles must have a single title, by the design of the system; this page is intended to help editors agree on which name of a place is to appear as the title.

Nevertheless, other names, especially those used significantly often (say, 10% of the time or more) in the available English literature on a place, past or present, should be mentioned in the article, as encyclopedic information. Two or three alternate names can be mentioned in the first line of the article; it is general Misplaced Pages practice to bold them so they stand out, although non-Latin scripts - Greek, Cyrillic, Chinese - are not bolded because they are distinguishable from running text anyway; transliterations are normally italicised. If there are more names than this, or the first line is cluttered, a separate paragraph on the names of the place is often a good idea. It will serve neutrality to list the names in alphabetical order by language (Armenian name1, Belarusian name2, Czech name3). or (ar: name1, be: name2, cs: name3). Local official names are often listed first, out of alphabetical order.

Disambiguation

It is often the case that the same widely accepted English name will apply to more than one place, or to a place and to other things; in either case disambiguation will be necessary. For general rules about this topic, see Misplaced Pages:Disambiguation.

The following should be considered in disambiguating the names of places.

• If a place is the primary topic for a particular name, then its article should normally carry that name (for example, Kuala Lumpur, Mont Blanc). However, if idiom or specific naming conventions indicate a different article title as more appropriate, then a redirect should be created to that article from the term for which it is the primary topic. For example, Thames redirects to the article named River Thames, and Danzig redirects to Gdańsk.
• When there are conventional means of disambiguation in standard English, use them, as in Red River of the North and Red River of the South, and in New York City (to distinguish from the state of New York).
• Rivers, lakes and mountains often include the word River, Lake or Mount in the name; national conventions and idiom should be followed in this matter. For example, rivers in the UK and Ireland follow the pattern River Thames, while those in the United States follow Mississippi River. For many countries the additional word is used when needed for disambiguation purposes, but is otherwise omitted: compare Jade (river) or Achelous River (which require disambiguation) with Rhine (which does not). See also Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Rivers#Naming.

In other cases, a disambiguating tag will usually be needed. In some cases (as with most U.S. towns) it is conventional to add such a tag even when it is not strictly needed for disambiguation purposes. The following general principles apply to such tags:

• Places are often disambiguated by the country in which they lie, if this is sufficient. However, when tags are required for places in the United States, Canada and Australia, use the name of the state, province or territory (if the place lies within a single such entity).
• If using the country name would still lead to ambiguity, use the name of a smaller administrative division (such as a state or province) instead.
• Rivers can also be disambiguated by the body of water into which they flow.
• With the names of cities, towns, villages and other settlements, as well as administrative divisions, the tag is normally preceded by a comma, as in Hel, Poland, and Polk County, Tennessee. Any specific national convention takes precedence though.
• With natural features, the tag normally appears in parentheses, as in Eagle River (Colorado). Specific pre-existing national conventions may take precedence though.
• Generic parenthetical disambiguating tags as used for most Misplaced Pages articles are used only occasionally for geographic names (as in Wolin (town), where no regional tag would be sufficient to distinguish the town from the island of Wolin).

If specific disambiguation conventions apply to places of a particular type or in a particular country, then it is important to follow these. Such conventions (or links to them) can be found in the section below titled Specific topics. If a country has no convention listed, and there is a clear pattern among the articles on places in that country, follow it. Please note any such pattern here, as a proposed national convention.

Order of names in title

Where multiple geographic names occur in a title, the names should be placed in alphabetical order unless there is a clear reason for another order. Hypothetical examples: Andorra–Liechtenstein relations; Otters of the Amazon and Orinoco deltas.

Specific topics

Administrative subdivisions

• WP:NCCS

Names of classes of places follow the same guidance: do what English does. In particular, when dealing with administrative and other subdivisions, we write of Russian oblasts and the Moscow Oblast, but of Chinese and Roman provinces, not sheng or provinciae.

It is useful for all divisions of the same type in the same country to share the same article title format (for example, nearly all provinces of Italy have the format "Province of X"), so if one district in a country has its article renamed from X to X District, it is worth discussing whether the same should be done with all districts. But titles should not be forced into uniformity when this would be a violation of idiom or otherwise inappropriate; whether the uniformity is worth the cost should be decided in each case on its merits.

Natural features

For further guidance on the naming of articles about lakes, mountains and rivers, see:

• Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Lakes#Naming
• Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Mountains#Naming conventions
• Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Rivers#Naming

Country-specific guidance

Where there is no Misplaced Pages convention on a specific country and disambiguation is necessary, it is generally reasonable to use ], as in Shire, Ethiopia.

When naming topics related to some specific country, prefer the form "(Item) of (Country)" over forms with adjectives (for example, History of Japan rather than Japanese history). See Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (country-specific topics).

The pages and categories below represent what discussion and opinions have actually taken place in Misplaced Pages. Their force consists of the force of their arguments and the extent of the consensus that backs them; listing here does not warrant either virtue.

Argentina

Where possible, articles on places in Argentina use ]. Where disambiguation is required, ] is used, except for provincial capitals which use ]. See Category:Populated places in Argentina and its subcategories.

Australia

Most Australian town/city/suburb articles are at ] no matter their state of ambiguity but the undisambiguated ] is also acceptable if the article has a unique name or is the primary topic for that name. Local government areas are at their official name.

Where further disambiguation is required, then the local government area name is used, in parentheses following the state name: ] (such as Springfield, Victoria (Macedon Ranges)).

Belarus

Major cities (voblast capitals) are named according to the most common English usage. All other settlements are named according to national rules (exceptions may be discussed case by case).

Bermuda

All geographic articles relating to places in Bermuda have titles in the form XXX, Bermuda, irrespective of the type of landform the article's subject is, and irrespective of whether disambiguation is necessary. Thus, for example, the article on Perot Island is at Perot Island, Bermuda, not Perot Island (Bermuda) or Perot Island.

Brazil

Where possible, articles on cities in Brazil use ]. Where disambiguation is required, ] is used. An exception applies when the city name and the state name are the same: Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro (state); São Paulo, São Paulo (state).

Canada

See Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (Canada-related articles).

China

See Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Chinese). See also Hong Kong conventions below.

France

See Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (France & French-related)

Finland

See Toponyms of Finland.

Article titles should be in the majority language (Finnish or Swedish) of the province, municipality, region or sub-region, unless there is a well-established name in English. The minority language of the area should be mentioned in the lead chapter either in bold (if the municipality is bilingual), or in italics (if the municipality is unilingual). Any second name needs to be referenced by a reliable secondary source; often the best will be recognition by the Research Institute for the Languages of Finland (see list).

The secondary names of municipalities should not be mentioned in other articles than the article about the municipality itself (e.g., "Helsinki (Swedish: Helsingfors)" should not be used anywhere else than in the lead of Helsinki) unless it is of a special interest, as the secondary name can be seen in the main article's lead and infobox.

For places in the Sami Domicile Area, the name in the Sami languages should be mentioned in the article's lead in italics.

Germany

Where possible, articles on places in Germany use ] unless there is a common English name (e.g. Munich or Nuremberg). Where disambiguation is required, follow the official disambiguation system which may take 3 forms:

• Part of the official name itself often using a river, nearby town, region or state. Examples: Offenbach am Main, Rothenburg ob der Tauber; Neustadt bei Coburg, Bernau bei Berlin; Zell im Fichtelgebirge, Eschenbach in der Oberpfalz; Neustadt in Sachsen.

• In brackets after the name, based on the local district, river, town, region or state. The brackets are often an official part of the name and appear on road signs. Examples: Velden (Pegnitz) (after the River Pegnitz), Kempten (Allgäu) (after the Allgäu region).

• After a forward slash (noting that this is currently deprecated. Brackets may be used instead). Example: Neustadt/Harz (after the Harz mountains).

For further guidance on German placenames, including geographical and man-made features, see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Germany/Conventions.

Hong Kong

Where possible, articles on places in Hong Kong use ]. Where disambiguation is required, ] is used. Thus Quarry Bay but Stanley, Hong Kong.

India

A convention was under discussion at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Indian districts/Naming and Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(settlements)/Archive_18#India.

Ireland

Where possible, articles on places in Ireland use ]. Where disambiguation is required, ] is used. Thus Castlebar but Westport, County Mayo. This same convention applies to both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. For further guidance see Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles).

Isle of Man

Where possible, articles on places on the Isle of Man use ]. Where disambiguation is required, ] is used. Thus Castletown but Peel, Isle of Man.

Israel–Palestine

See Naming conventions (West Bank)

A convention was under discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Israel/Archive 2#Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (settlements).

Italy

Where possible, articles on places in Italy use ]. Where disambiguation is required, places in Italy are disambiguated using the "comma convention" by the larger of the region, province or municipality needed to identify it uniquely, as appropriate. Placename, Italy is rarely unique, and should not be used except when the place is only ambiguous with places outside Italy. The autonomous provinces of South Tyrol and Trentino are treated like de facto regions. Places in those provinces that require disambiguation take the form Placename, South Tyrol or Placename, Trentino respectively.

Articles previously used the two-letter abbreviations for the provinces: these should no longer be used.

Examples:

• Two locations in different regions: Castro, Apulia and Castro, Lombardy;
• Two locations in the same province: Ronchi, Bra and Ronchi, Cuneo (both in the Province of Cuneo);
• Two locations in the same region, and a third in a different region: Manciano, Arezzo and Manciano, Grosseto (both in the Region of Tuscany) but Manciano, Umbria.

The region containing the autonomous provinces of Trentino and South Tyrol is referred to as Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol.

South Tyrol

• WP:NBZ

In South Tyrol, the local authority recognizes equally two or more names from different languages, and English discussion is often so limited that none of the above tests indicate which of them is widely used in English. However, there is an official linguistic survey of the area, by municipality, which has the following advantages:

• It is available on-line, and officially published.
• The proportions of the various language groups are fairly stable.
• Most municipalities have a large majority, often a 90% majority, of one language group.
• In the few cases where there is a widely used English name, it is usually that of the majority language group.

Therefore, articles about locations in South Tyrol are placed according to the language of the linguistic majority.

Japan

See Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles).

Korea

See Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Korean).

Macau/Macao

Macau is spelled idiomatically either with a "u" or an "o" as last letter. For consistency on Misplaced Pages, title articles using the "u" spelling unless a proper name in English uses the "o" spelling.

Malaysia

Where possible, articles on places in Malaysia use ]. Where disambiguation with a place outside of Malaysia is required, ] is used, if disambiguation between two places in Malaysia is required, ] is used.

Names of places should generally use the English name, unless it is more commonly known in English sources by the local name. For example, mountains should be titled ] rather than ], rivers should be titled ] rather than ], and islands should be titled ] rather than ].

Mexico

Where possible, articles on places in Mexico use ]: Acapulco. Where disambiguation is required, ], is used (the "comma convention", as in Nogales, Sonora, or Córdoba, Veracruz). The cities that share names with states have been placed at ]], with the state taking the ] location: for example, Oaxaca, Oaxaca, (city) and Oaxaca (state).

Micronesia, Federated States of

When referring to the Federated States of Micronesia, the long-form is preferred. There is no official short-form name for the country. The use of simply "Micronesia" can be seen as inaccurate and ambiguous, since this name primarly refers to a geographic region.

Mongolia

See Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Mongolian).

New Zealand

See Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (New Zealand).

Norway

See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Norway#Naming.

Philippines

• WP:MOSPHIL

Where possible, articles on cities use ] (e.g., Dumaguete). Where disambiguation is required, city articles go under ] (e.g., Valencia, Bukidnon) or ] (e.g., Lucena, Philippines). All municipalities are under the format ] (e.g., Valencia, Negros Oriental).

Poland

See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Poland/Conventions.

Russia

This naming convention covers all types of inhabited localities in Russia: cities/towns, urban-type settlements, and all kinds of rural localities.

First, always check whether the conventional English name of the locality (as defined by WP:RUS#Place names) exists; if one is available, use it. In absence thereof, use romanized Russian name, as per the WP:RUS default romanization guidelines.

• When the name of the locality is not unique within Russia, use comma-separated name of the federal subject on the territory of which the locality is situated (e.g., Oktyabrsky, Republic of Bashkortostan). If the name of the locality is not unique within a federal subject, precede the federal subject disambiguator with the name of the district on the territory of which the locality is situated (e.g., Vesyoly, Shovgenovsky District, Republic of Adygea).
• When the name of the locality is unique within Russia, but conflicts with the name of another locality in a different country, disambiguate the name with "Russia" (e.g., Dimitrovgrad, Russia).
• When the name of the locality is completely unique, but conflicts with the name of a different concept, use the parenthesized locality type as disambiguator (e.g., Chupa (urban-type settlement)).

South Africa

Where possible, articles on places in South Africa use ]. Where disambiguation is required, ] is used.

Switzerland

See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Swiss municipalities/Article title conventions.

United Kingdom

• WP:UKPLACE

Where possible, articles on places in the United Kingdom use ]. Where disambiguation is required, a different system is used in each of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. Disambiguation should never be to post town, former postal county or postcode district.

England

Where possible, articles on places in England go under placename.

For localities requiring disambiguation:

• The usual convention is to use ]. For example, Halling, Kent.
• When the city and the county use variants of the same name (and disambiguation is required) disambiguate with England for clarity throughout the English-speaking world; thus Lincoln, England, not Lincoln, Lincolnshire.
• For localities within Greater London: ] is used.
• For localities unambiguously located within a town/city settlement (according to reliable, external sources) ] is used. For example, within the borough of Milton Keynes, for localities in the defined new city area ] is used, as with Bradwell, Milton Keynes. Localities within the borough but outside the city area continue to be disambiguated by ceremonial county, as with Olney, Buckinghamshire.
• When further disambiguation is required district/unitary is used. Example: two Belmonts in London become Belmont, Sutton and Belmont, Harrow. If there are two places of the same name in the same district/unitary then parishes, wards, or lowercase compass directions are used as appropriate to identify the relative locations. Example: two Woolstons in Shropshire unitary authority become Woolston, north Shropshire and Woolston, south Shropshire.

Wales

Where possible, articles on places in Wales go under placename. Where disambiguation is required ] is used. Thus Queensferry, Flintshire, not Queensferry, Wales (which is a redirect page) or Queensferry, Clwyd.

Following discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Welsh Wikipedians' notice board it was agreed that where a county borough is to be disambiguated, it should go under ]. Thus Conwy County Borough, not County Borough of Conwy, Conwy (county borough) or Conwy county borough.

Scotland

Where possible, articles on places in Scotland go under ]. Thus Glasgow, not Glasgow, Scotland. Where disambiguation is required, ] is normally used. Thus Cullen, Moray, not Cullen, Scotland. If even more disambiguation is required, then another form of natural and recognisable disambiguation is used, such as traditional regions, committee areas etc. as in: Kinnaird, Gowrie; and Kinnaird, Atholl; both in Scotland and in Perth and Kinross. For settlements on Scottish islands where disambiguation is required, the place name is followed by the name of the island or island-chain rather than by Scotland or council area. Examples include: Uig, Skye; Tarbert, Harris; and Balfour, Orkney. (Lewis and Harris are treated as separate islands for this purpose). Exceptions include:

• the small number of larger towns or islands that are likely to be well-known outside of the region, that also require disambiguation such as Perth, Scotland and Jura, Scotland.
• settlements in Argyll and Bute. As island settlements will be styled in the form Rothesay, Bute mainland Argyll settlements may be styled ].
• settlements in Highland. This large area has many small settlements that should be identified by District where disambiguation is required, save that as island settlements will be styled in the form Broadford, Skye mainland Skye and Lochlash settlements may be styled ].

Northern Ireland

Where possible, articles on places in Northern Ireland go under ]. Where disambiguation is required, articles should go under ]. Thus Omagh but Bangor, County Down. This same convention applies to the Republic of Ireland.

United States

The canonical form for cities, towns and census-designated places in the United States is ] (the "comma convention"). Those places that need additional disambiguation include their county or parish (for example Elgin, Lancaster County, South Carolina and Elgin, Kershaw County, South Carolina). If more than one place within the same county has the same name, specify the type of local government unit in parentheses before the comma (e.g., Poughkeepsie (city), New York and Poughkeepsie (town), New York, but not "Poughkeepsie, New York (city)"). A small number of unincorporated communities bear two states' names due to their peculiar locations across state lines, such as Glenrio, New Mexico and Texas; Freedom, Idaho and Wyoming; and Ray, Indiana and Michigan.

Cities listed in the AP Stylebook as not requiring the state modifier may or may not have their articles named ] provided they are the primary topic for that name. The cities listed by the AP are Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Honolulu, Houston, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New Orleans, New York City, Oklahoma City, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington. In other cases, this guideline recommends following the "comma convention" as described above.

A United States city's article should never be titled "city, country" (e.g., "Detroit, United States") or "city, state, country" (e.g., "Kansas City, Missouri, USA"); that is contrary to general American usage.

Neighborhoods within New York City have been identified by the standard ], where "borough" is one of the five boroughs: Brooklyn, Bronx, Manhattan, Queens or Staten Island.

U.S. highways should be listed as is found in Category:U.S. Highway System.

Vietnam

A naming convention is under discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Vietnam.

Fictional cities

In order to make the distinction clear, cities which represent a fictional setting do not follow the same naming convention as real locations, even if the fictional city is said to be within a real state, province, or other subdivision. For example:

• Sunnydale, not "Sunnydale, California" (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)
• Avonlea, not "Avonlea, Prince Edward Island" (Anne of Green Gables)
• Gopher Prairie, not "Gopher Prairie, Minnesota" (works of Sinclair Lewis)

When necessary to disambiguate with other articles, preference is given to using the author's name (literature), the name of the work (television or movies), or other connective quality.

• Castle Rock (Stephen King)
• Dunwich (H. P. Lovecraft)
• Springfield (The Simpsons)
• Haddonfield (Halloween)
• Metropolis (comics)

Transliteration

For a list of pages dealing with the transliteration of names from other writing systems into the Latin alphabet, see Misplaced Pages:Romanization. Transliteration issues are discussed further at Misplaced Pages:Accessibility.

See also

• Misplaced Pages:Proper names, especially the section on place names
• List of European regions with alternative names
• List of country names in various languages
• Misplaced Pages:Seven rules of place naming

References

1. "How can I see more than 1000 results in google ?". Google. Retrieved 2011-03-27.
2. Primary topic should be judged against all encyclopedic usages of a name; thus, for example, discussions of Phoenix should consider the mythological Phoenix, and discussions of St. Louis should consider Louis IX of France.
3. Goldstein, Norm (2004). "Stylebook, section D: datelines". The Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law (39th ed.). New York: Basic Books/Associated Press. p. 66. ISBN 9780465004881. {{cite book}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
4. Using disambiguation by state in cases where it is not necessary has the advantage of providing consistent article titles for United States places (a majority of these names are ambiguous and so require disambiguation anyway), but the disadvantage of inconsistency with the titles used for articles on places in most other countries (where redundant disambiguation is not used, although Australia is another exception), as well as a loss of conciseness. Current convention is to omit the state only with the well-known cities which the Associated Press lists as not requiring the state qualifier in a journalistic context, unless they, like Phoenix, conflict with another non-geographic article; the Associated Press Stylebook is a reliable source, written in American English.

• Misplaced Pages naming conventions