Talk:Milan Central railway station

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Stations.
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.
Milan Central railway station is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was withdrawn by nominator.--Tbo 157talk 17:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC) Milan Central StationMilano Centrale station — Milano Centrale is a proper noun, it is the correct name and it is the most commonly used name of the station worldwide. A google test will confirm this if you analyse the results and the relevance of each result. All European timetables and maps also refer to the station as Milano Centrale. Also the article, Roma Termini station is not at Rome Terminal station. —Tbo 157talk 22:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Strongly oppose These 55 books are not balanced by any hits on the proposed name. Maps are not good guides to English usage, as WP:NCGN remarks; they have good reasons to show what's on the building, even if English visitors call it something else. It is possible that the c and s should be lower case. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Google books, which does not list all books and is still in beta, is your only source. Also please tell me why Roma Termini station is not at Rome terminus station if the google books search shows more results for "Rome Terminus station". I also tried the Google test and analysed each result. Tbo 157talk 18:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
      • Because no one moved it. This is an WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS argument; please read the link. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
        • With all due respect, thats an essay or a belief held by some Wikipedians and im guessing you hold it too. It is not a policy or a guideline. Also my main argument wasn't WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It was WP:NC(CN) which is an actual policy. A google test shows that both Milano Centrale and Roma Termini are more commonly used than Milan Central and Rome Terminus. But of course, you have the freedom to hold your belief and to oppose this move. Tbo 157talk 23:00, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
          • Present your evidence, and you may change my mind. Raw www.google.com is unlikely to do this; it has too many flaws. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
            • Google books has as many flaws as raw google as they hardly list any books and is still in beta. What would you consider a reliable source? Fact books usually aren't very good for finding out common names as they tend to use the formal name. Fiction books are likely to use common names but I can't think of a way to search in fiction books on the net. The best way to find out on Wikipedia would be to get more user input. I can't think of any other way to prove a common name on wikipedia. Can you? I just hear more people refer to it as Milano Centrale station than Milan Central and this can be proved on raw google but obviously these aren't convincing arguments for you. Tbo 157talk 18:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
            • From what Ive seen on Wikipedia in the past, theres no real way to determine a common name as google searches have to many flaws and there are not many ways to determine a common name. This has resulted in many edit wars in the past. So I don't know what to do. Tbo 157talk 18:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The English name is widely used and there is nothing presented here showing that the Italian name is widely used in English worldwide. (WP:NC(CN) must coexist with WP:UE, i.e., the title should be the most common name used by English-speaking Wikipedia users in general, not just expats in Milan with knowledge of Italian for example.) — AjaxSmack 13:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
    • There is no evidence for what you said. My case was WP:NC(CN) which should be a applied even if it is a foreign name. WP:UE states that an English name should be used unless there is a foreign alternative which is more common. As, however there seems to be no evidence of what is the common name as I have realised that Google tests are never reliable, WP:UE seems to apply more here and so I have decided to withdraw my proposal and apologise for any inconvenience caused. Tbo 157talk 17:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.