Talk:Toledo, Spain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography by William Smith (1856).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Toledo, Spain article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Suggested external links

I have some more general photos of the city itself at http://dheera.net/photos/thumb.php?q=europe2005/toledo , if someone wants to include it. All the photos will be captioned by their appropriate building names and locations very shortly.

The following discussion is an archived debate 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 debate was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 11:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

In addition to being the original place with the name, it is an important historical city, even if Toledo, Ohio is larger. The "what links here" refers entirely to the Spanish city (I fixed 20 or so that meant the city in Ohio), and naming conventions with American cities would put the Ohio city at its current location anyway. Per other cities such as Birmingham and Norfolk, I think Toledo deserves to be at its natural name. (The "city, province" method would Yield "Toledo, Toledo" and we don't want to go down that road.

[edit] Survey

  • Strongly oppose. Where does it end, folks? Do we move Boston, Lincolnshire to Boston just because the English city is oldest? We have an ideal situation right now: Those looking for the larger American city will be led to Toledo, Ohio; those looking for the Spanish city will be led to Toledo, Spain. Those typing in Toledo will get a disambiguation page advising them of the various subjects named Toledo. I don't see where this is a problem. -- SwissCelt 00:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose Even Lincoln has been made a dab page, and that was a stronger claim than this is. Claiming that something is a primary meaning of term generally requires a large supermajority of usage, which neither Toledo meets. Septentrionalis 19:54, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The course of least inconvenience to reader and editor alike would seem to be to leave things pretty much as they are, particularly in the absence of any consistently-applied naming policy for Spanish localities. While the Spanish city's claim to most frequent usage has merit, IMO it's not quite strong enough to warrant the proposed alteration.--cjllw | TALK 00:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose A redirect or disambig at Toledo is best. Sending the user to the fully named "Toledo, Spain" provides a nice, extra confirmation that the reader is indeed at the correct article. --Davidstrauss 09:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

  • I'd also add that no one is proposing "Toledo, Toledo" as the name of this article. And frankly, given the size of Birmingham, Alabama and Norfolk, Virginia, the case could be made that the corresponding articles (Birmingham and Norfolk) should be made disambiguation pages, as there's arguably no primary topic for disambiguation. But we'll save that battle for another day. -- SwissCelt 01:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  • In response to the Boston comment, I thought of mentioning that as an exception where one is significantly more notable than the other, but here, that's not the case. And as I mentioned below, if you'd like to suggest moving those other pages to disambiguations, you're welcome to try - but I doubt you'll get very far. --Vedek Dukat Talk 02:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  • So what, do we exempt Eastern Hemisphere towns from disambiguation unless there is a Western Hemisphere town which is significantly more notable? That's ridiculous. That's also demonstrating a regional bias, which is ironic considering how frequently we Americans are accused of this bias. By the way, you're neglecting to mention the edit you made to Toledo, Ohio in which you removed the helpful boilerplate directing people to Toledo, Spain and Toledo. I'm beginning to see a pattern... -- SwissCelt 02:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Could you try to be a little more civil? Not that it's your business, but I'm from California, and Toledo does not redirect to Toledo, Ohio, thus making a disambig notice redundant. What "pattern" are you talking about? --Vedek Dukat Talk 03:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  • If it's redundant for Toledo, Ohio, then it's redundant for Toledo, Spain. Toledo does not redirect to this article, either. Nor should it. -- SwissCelt 05:41, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Whatever is done about the move, both articles should have dab headers pointing to the other (or a dab). Some reader will go to the wrong place, and want to get to the right one. Septentrionalis 22:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Well I apologize for removing the dab tag - I wasn't trying to provoke anyone by doing so (and after seeing SwissCelt's extreme reaction, I made sure to add {{User oops}} to my user page). I've actually reconsidered and decided the disambig page is best where it is. Sorry again. --Vedek Dukat Talk 01:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Let me just add that I really can't believe the Spanish Toledo isn't considered the primary meaning... —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 11:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disingenuous

Somebody's being disingenuous about the whole issue with Toledo, Ohio. First of all, there are still a number of links to Toledo that refer to the Ohio city, despite Vedek Dukat's claim that they all (now) refer to Toledo, Spain. Secondly, it's disingenuous to change the links to Toledo, Ohio, then infer that because the remaining links are for Toledo, Spain we should somehow believe that the latter usage is the most popular on Wikipedia. But most annoyingly, the statement at the top of this page that Toledo, Ohio is the most populous of the cities of the world named Toledo has been changed to read that Toledo, Ohio is merely the most populous of the cities of the US named Toledo. Unfair, people! Let's give Toledo, Ohio its due. There's no reason to relegate that city to secondary status just to artificially inflate the importance of its parent city. -- SwissCelt 01:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

First of all, my point was that more of them referred to this one in the first place because people use the US naming convention of (city, state). Second, the fact that I missed one or two or people linked to it after I posted that message (I'm not sure which, I haven't checked yet) does not make my motives dubious. Third, I did not make any such changes - the only edit I've ever made to the page was reverting someone's test vandalism. Finally, I'm not trying to "artificially inflate" anything by suggesting that we keep our articles uniform (if you'd like to suggest Birmingham and Norfolk be made disambiguation pages, you're welcome to try, but I doubt you'll get very far). --Vedek Dukat Talk 02:39, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
How many links currently go to what is irrelevant for choosing this article's name. What matter are convention and notability. Links to disambig pages should be fixed; moving articles to ambiguous names is just a hack. --Davidstrauss 09:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Demography

I'm moving the Demography section down to make the article more aesthetically pleasing... That's the way it's done with several other city articles including New York City and Paris. Ben Tibbetts 13:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sister cities

I can't find any confirmation that Jerusalem is a sister city of Toledo. Arpad 08:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC) And this source http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-twin-towns-and-sister-cities plainly state that sister city of Toledo is Toledo(Ohio) Arpad 08:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, answer.com copied that list from wikipedia, see List of twin towns and sister cities. Bukvoed 10:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Well - Toledo(Ohio) lists Toledo on its sister list here: http://www.tsci.org/ As for Jerusalem - I got zero result on all my searches Arpad 10:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Water Locks?

Is it possible that the reference in the article to the "Water Locks" might refer to the even more famous water clocks which were once located there? Following the link leads to the description of a device which appears to function as a water clock, a opposed to allowing ships or boats to navigate a sudden change in the elevation of a river. Is the most elegant fix to simply fix the text and delete the citation (citing, as it does, faulty text) 65.31.27.152 02:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC) Random Browser