| Revision as of 00:00, 4 March 2004 editIkari (talk | contribs)413 editsNo edit summary | Revision as of 17:58, 4 March 2004 edit undoHenrygb (talk | contribs)12,381 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| No-one is going to win a renaming war and it makes the encyclopedia look pretty unproffessional. -] (3 Mar, 2004). | No-one is going to win a renaming war and it makes the encyclopedia look pretty unproffessional. -] (3 Mar, 2004). | ||
| I would certainly go for county article "Londonderry" and the city article "Derry" if there is to be a compromise. The county has only been "Londonderry" officially, while the town/city has been "Derry" originally, "Londonderry" in its city charter, and "Derry" in its district council name so 2-1 to "Derry". It doesn't matter much, but stability would be sensible. --] 17:58, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:58, 4 March 2004
Is it just me or does all this constant renaming of the two Londonderry/Derry articles from one name to another strike anyone else as a little childish?
Clearly we need a compromise everyone can live with. I suggest we call the county article "Londonderry" and the city article "Derry". Or vice versa if anyone has a strong reason to prefer it the other way.
The explanation at the start of each article that there are two names should of course be kept.
No-one is going to win a renaming war and it makes the encyclopedia look pretty unproffessional. -Ikari (3 Mar, 2004).
I would certainly go for county article "Londonderry" and the city article "Derry" if there is to be a compromise. The county has only been "Londonderry" officially, while the town/city has been "Derry" originally, "Londonderry" in its city charter, and "Derry" in its district council name so 2-1 to "Derry". It doesn't matter much, but stability would be sensible. --Henrygb 17:58, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)