Talk:Puerto Soledad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article should be merged into Port Louis, Falkland Islands. --MacRusgail 16:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I tend to agree, it may confuse having articles for the same place with two different names. Justin talk 16:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Plus Port Louis covers much of the same time period. --MacRusgail 18:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The only argument I can see for a separate article, is that there were three separate settlements in the one place. Originally Port St Louis a short lived French settlement, Puerto Soledad the Spanish settlement abandoned in 1811 and finally Puerto Luis/Anson's Harbour/Port Louis that traces through till today. Each could arguably have a small article linked to the main article. An appropriate analogy might be the two articles we have for Constantinople and Istanbul. Justin talk 09:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thinking about it a bit more, we have articles for the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata, the United Provinces of the River Plate and Argentina. All are referring to historically the same place but for different political epochs and is more appropriate an analogy. There's definitely an argument for a main and separate articles. Justin talk 12:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Usually there would be... but the histories of Byzantium, Constantinople and Istanbul (under each individual name) by themselves are far more complex (and lengthy) than the entire history of the Falklands. Likewise, with Argentina, and even the River Plate articles, we are dealing with much larger areas, and populations. --MacRusgail 18:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Also that first map needs to be sorted out. I can only see two red dots, and some writing on it!!! - But thanks for creating it though!. --MacRusgail 18:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Usually there would be...is kinda undermining the argument for merging them. :-) Justin talk 23:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

There's several factors against it... #1 It was never a big settlement in size or population. #2 It wasn't known as Puerto Soledad for long, and even then, that was the second name. #3 Although it forms a basis for the Argentine claims, more could be said about a year in Byzantium/Constantinople/Istanbul a piece, than the entire existence of Puerto Soledad. It was a small outpost, which has acquired an inflated significance, thanks to 20th century international relations. --MacRusgail 15:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't disagree with any of that but once again the "inflated 20th century significance" argues more for a separate article than combining them. I leaned toward your suggestion at first but what you've said since makes me swing the other way. Justin talk —Preceding comment was added at 16:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)