Talk:Province of Trento/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Move Province of Trento to Autonomous Province of Trento 1.1 Survey 1.1.1 Survey - in support of the move 1.1.2 Survey - in opposition to the move 1.2 Discussion 2 Move Province of Trento to Trentino 2.1 Survey 2.1.1 Survey - in support of the move 2.1.2 Survey - in opposition to the move 3 ok... 4 Straw Poll 4.1 Autonomous Province of Trento 4.2 Province of Trento 4.3 Trentino 4.4 split of administrative vs. historical 5 Straw Poll 5.1 Autonomous Province of Trento 5.2 Province of Trento 5.3 Trentino 5.4 Discussion 6 Requested move 6.1 Survey 6.2 Discussion 7 Requested move back (1 June 2007)

[edit] Move Province of Trento to Autonomous Province of Trento

Province of Trento → Autonomous Province of Trento – The Province of Trento is more than a Province, it is an autonomous province, and the correct name for it is Provincia Autonoma di Trento (in English: Autonomous Province of Trento). Checco 09:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

[edit] Survey - in support of the move

1. Support The special status of the autonomous provinces is worth recognizing in the titles of the articles. —Ian Spackman 17:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Support Actually, I can support this name change too. Eventually Province of Bolzano-Bozen should follow this as well. Taalo 17:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey - in opposition to the move

1. Oppose --Martin Se 09:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC) (a mention in the first line is enough)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

I would actually propose we strike out all this complicated "Autonomous Province of X" part and go with a simple "Trentino". Gryffindor 10:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Trentino redirects to this page and is a regional name. Province of Trento works well. Taalo 20:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

No it does not. The article talks not just about the autonomous province, but about the history of the entire region as well. Do a Google search and you will see which term is used more often. Gryffindor 15:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Alrighty, thanks for sharing your POV. Taalo 17:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Eh, that's something I'd support, too... Tridentinus 13:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh dio.. :P Ok, well I have a lot of affection for the name Trentino as well, but I'd really hope we can have a Province of Trento page as well. It still makes sense to me to simply have redirects from Trentino and Alto Adige/Sudtirol (South Tyrol) to the modern provinces. Taalo 17:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Trentino is realy the same as Province of Trento. I'd support this move :-|--Martin Se 09:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Well then I'd think we should have a Trentino and Province of Trento page and a Alto Adige/Südtirol and Province of Bolzano-Bozen page. It seems obvious that going for one or the other is just going to create debates until the end of time. Taalo 05:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Move Province of Trento to Trentino

Province of Trento → Trentino – The article talks about the historical region. Official names are not used on Wikipedia for territories. A Google search shows that the term "Trentino" gets 26,700,000 hits, "Province of Trento" 1,220,000 hits, "Autonomous Province of Trento" 82,100 hits. So I think this case is pretty obvious. Gryffindor 17:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

[edit] Survey - in support of the move

1. Support to move Gryffindor 17:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Support also. Trentino has been where it was much longer than the province (by this I mean, it's a historical unit, as opposed to the provinces of, say, Lombardy). Province of Trento sees little use outside the mail office :). Thank you for this, Gryffindor. Tridentinus 01:00, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey - in opposition to the move

1. Oppose I'll assume good faith, but my gut tells me this is sour grapes on the part of Gryffindor regarding the move of South Tyrol. Bottom line, the convention is Province of X. We have a redirect from the area name to the province name. If it is decided on South Tyrol to do a split (very likely) of a history section and a province section, then I'd say there is some validity to doing that here too. Taalo 22:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ok...

we have multiple polls and this is getting a bit ridiculous again. Could someone scrap the above move requests and go for a poll again like we did on other pages. So far I see Province of Trento, Autonomous Province of Trento, and Trentino. As at South Tyrol we should obviously consider a split in articles between provincial and historical. Taalo 05:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Straw Poll

So we don't have to run multiple polls at the same time (which I've put over in the archive), here is a list of the three most common names that people seem to prefer. I will move people's support votes here, they of course can change later. Also, please say if you support a split between the area historia and an actual administrative province page. It looks like we are likely going to split South Tyrol into a Province of BZ and a historical page. thanks Taalo 07:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autonomous Province of Trento

1. Support The special status of the autonomous provinces is worth recognizing in the titles of the articles. —Ian Spackman 17:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Support Actually, I can support this name change too. Eventually Province of Bolzano-Bozen should follow this as well. Taalo 17:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
3. Support --Checco 12:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Province of Trento

[edit] Trentino

1. Support to move Gryffindor 17:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Support also. Trentino has been where it was much longer than the province (by this I mean, it's a historical unit, as opposed to the provinces of, say, Lombardy). Province of Trento sees little use outside the mail office :). Tridentinus 01:00, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] split of administrative vs. historical

• Support I support a Province of TN and Trentino split. Taalo 07:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Checco 12:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose unnecessary Gryffindor 19:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Straw Poll

So we don't have to run multiple polls at the same time (which I've put over in the archive), here is a list of the three most common names that people seem to prefer. I will move people's support votes here, they of course can change later. Also, please say if you support a split between the area historia and an actual administrative province page. It looks like we are likely going to split South Tyrol into a Province of BZ and a historical page. thanks Taalo 07:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autonomous Province of Trento

1. Support The special status of the autonomous provinces is worth recognizing in the titles of the articles. —Ian Spackman 17:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Support --Checco 12:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
3. Support --Rarelibra 19:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
4. Support This along with a History of Trentino and redirect of Trentino to Autonomous Province of Trento. Icsunonove 23:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Province of Trento

1. Support the most logical name, according to this page, though it is really "morally" irrelevant for me if you decide one or the other. Will we have to move "Province of Belluno" to "Bellunese" or something like that, then? However, I have to say that I'm astonished by the meannes and perseverance of some of the people involved in this polls, even for a non-controversial issue like this.--Supparluca 08:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

   There was certainly some interesting reaction after the T-AA/ST move. heh. Icsunonove 17:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trentino

1. Support to move Gryffindor 17:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Support also. Trentino has been where it was much longer than the province (by this I mean, it's a historical unit, as opposed to the provinces of, say, Lombardy). Province of Trento sees little use outside the mail office :). Tridentinus 01:00, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
3. Support, most common and simple name. —Nightstallion (?) 15:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
4. Support We should use the most common names. Just as the Article on the Federal Republic of Germany is called Germany or the one on the Republic of Austria is called Austria.

   Ok, so I got a great idea for you then. Why don't you go to de.wikipedia, and move all the Provinz X pages to just X? Italienische Provinz Come back and tell us how it goes, m'kay? :] Icsunonove 16:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Requested move

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --Stemonitis 08:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I count five yeas for the move, and four against it. How was that no consensus? Tridentinus 17:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

consensus: agreement in the judgment or opinion reached by a group as a whole; "the lack of consensus reflected differences in theoretical positions"; "those rights and obligations are based on an unstated consensus" -- 5-4 isn't really consensus, it is the opposite really. you have almost a 50-50 split, with the narrowest of difference (one vote).

I didn't know there was also a minimum quorum required for a vote to be valid. With 9 votes, dramatic gaps were unlikely to happen. Tridentinus 21:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

How about we switch back and forth every month from Trentino to Autonomous Province of Trento. Or every six months, like the EU presidency? :-) Anyway, we should figure out a way to have the "Province of" for TN and BZ and also the Trentino and Alto Adige/South Tyrol pages for the areas. We should brainstorm a bit on how to do it well. We could reduce the "Province of" pages down to just core administrative information? Icsunonove 23:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move back (1 June 2007)

Today’s unilateral move to Trentino was made despite the fact that this talk page made it clear that no such move had achieved consensus. It should be reverted to the status quo ante (Province of Trento) until a consensus is found for some other name.( Some oddity in page histories means that no instant move-back was possible). —Ian Spackman 16:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with you, of course. Also Gryffindor's absurd unilateral move of Merano to Meran should be reverted, and eventually Gryffindor should be prevented from editing anything related to this province, since he doesn't accept to apply the conventions he surely knows.--Supparluca 19:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I will certainly endorse an RfC; this is going much too far, and he deleted a page to do it; I have consulted ANI Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You all need to calm down, and rather quickly. There was a vote and the majority was discovered and acted upon - no matter how close the vote was or not. Consensus was to move the page to the current naming convention, period. Pamderson - I will challenge any and all such endorsements for RfC, as well as ensure that ANI knows ALL actions (yours and Supparlucas included), including the voting that DID reach consensus. It seems there is a deep and ongoing personal issue with some of you and Gryffindor, and that needs to stop. What he does is by the book wiki - calls for a vote, allows time, tallies the vote, and if consensus is reached, acts upon it. Rarelibra 13:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

There was no consensus. I am not at all hot under the collar. You might need to calm down (I haven’t felt beneath your collar;) .) It is clear that Gryffindor abused the powers given to him as an admin: a fact that I was not aware of when I raised the issue. But cool off, noone insulted you—you shouldn’t have insulted me. But relax, I’ll forget about it. —Ian Spackman 14:00, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You are too funny, Mr. Spackman. Please point out how YOU were insulted. Take a deep breath - and concentrate. Gryffndor did nothing wrong, and did not abuse any powers. Consensus was reached, period. Just because you don't like how it turned out doesn't give you the right to make accusations. Did Gryffndor make accusations after the Trentino-Alto Adige/South Tyrol vote? NO. Rarelibra 14:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, actually. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't think so... how about diffs? Rarelibra 15:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually the key issue is not whether you insult me (obviously you do—as the person who started this section I have to be included among the people who, in your words ‘all need to calm down’, but I will forget about it within an hour (Or at any rate I will forget which of the many people with silly usernames offered a vague insult). The key point is that no consensus was achieved. It wasn’t: the decision was perfectly clear:

‘It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --Stemonitis 08:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)’[2]

Another editor—who had certainly noticed that decision—waited for a good while before moving the page, merrily deleting articles on the way (a power which he has an admin, and a power which he clearly abused). The article should clearly be moved back to its status quo, pronto.—Ian Spackman 15:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You talk of status quo but fail to see the rightful vote for consensus. Rarelibra 15:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Try looking harder. Try looking at the most recent edit to this page and read

‘It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --Stemonitis 08:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)’[3]

In other words: no case had been made to move the article to Trentino, let alone a case to move it using page deletions on the way,

—Ian Spackman 15:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

The poll above is clear, though: result is five to four in favour of moving to Trentino. Anyone who wants to say no consensus was reached should argument such a position better than just say, no consensus reached. Tridentinus 15:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Please read the governing Wikipedia policy: WP:Consensus. This is not a vote, and a 5-4 majority does not decide it. m:Voting is evil. We do not require, although we hope for, absolute unanimity; but when there is no strong agreement, the rule is to leave it as it was. After all, the next vote may be 5-4 the other way, depending on who notices it. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

The most common name in English by a large margin is "Trentino" and not "Province of Trento", so this current name goes against Wikipedia policy of most common name, if you are going to refer to Wikipedia policy. Gryffindor 18:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) is a guideline, not a policy, and it bothers me that you felt it was your responsibility to use - unilaterally - the administrative tools to apply your interpretation of the guideline when it was clear from prior discussion that at least some users would object to the action. The other page moves mentioned here bothered me too, but I am particularly troubled by the deletions. Dekimasuよ! 11:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

To Pmanderson - consensus is the majority. Majority of the vote said to move it. Gryffndor acted upon the consensus. Period. Why you have such a heartache I imagine must be for a personal reason, maybe. But you need to accept the fact that majority consensus said to move the page, thus the page was moved. You can go ahead yourself and call for another vote, if you like, and see the results. Rarelibra 19:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Did you read the article WP:Consensus s/he referred to? Do you have a problem with it? —Ian Spackman 03:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• And please note that it denies that a bare majority is consensus; if we meant "majority", we would say so. "Consensus is not vote-counting", and even the supermajority approximation requires 60-80%, depending on the question under consideration. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

• Hah, gone for awhile and see this junk all over again. Yes, I fully support a long overdue RfC on Gryffindor. Where do we sign up? Icsunonove 07:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)