Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:04, 23 September 2006

Requested move

Korsnäs, Finland → Korsnäs – There is no reason to keep the article at "Korsnäs, Finland" since Korsnäs redirects to "Korsnäs, Finland" and there are no other places known by the name of "Korsnäs" to justify the title "Korsnäs, Finland". The name of the current article is also against normal naming conventions of Finnish cities and municipalities. --TonyM 15:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The request succeeded with 63% support. --Dijxtra 11:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support moves and all similar moves to simple names if there is no ambiguity. --Polaron | Talk 15:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • but there is. 00:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support. No-brainer. See Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Move US Cities Across Redirects discussion about applying same logic to US cities. --Serge 17:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • no-brainer? You mean you did not use your brain? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 00:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support per NC and Category:Municipalities of Ostrobothnia Region. --Usgnus 06:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • which NC? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 00:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support there appears be little chance of confusion with this move --Edgelord 06:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • how did you measure this? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 00:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support, there are a few other places in Finland and Sweden with the same name, but the municipality is by far the most famous one. --MoRsΞ 18:22, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose too many other meanings. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 00:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• I can see you added some meanings of "Korsnäs" to Korsnäs. But wouldn't they be better off at Korsnäs (disambiguation)? --TonyM 14:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Agreed. Not only did he add some, but he changed the redirect page to a dab page in the middle of this move voting process. All of the other uses of the name are either not notable enough to have existing articles, or are villages or "parts of towns" that are under different names. Plus, anyone who supports having Korsnäs be a dab page can oppose this move. In the mean time, I've moved the newly created dab page to Korsnäs (disambiguation) and changed Korsnäs back to a redirect page to here, which is what it was when this survey was initiated until it was changed yesterday. --Serge 22:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. It seems to me that some of those other meanings (even if added by Tobias) might have articles some day. If there's a reasonable chance of ambiguity, the complete title should be used. Plus, this makes it obvious at a glance (should Korsnas redirect to Korsnas, Finland) which Korsnas you got, and whether you need to go to the disambig page (No need for a "this is about the Finnish city" hat note). SnowFire 20:03, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose --Inzulac 14:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
• Support. The Finnish locality looks to be the primary meaning, and as such should be at Korsnäs with a link to Korsnäs (disambiguation) at the beginning of the article. Olessi 15:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Bolivian Unicyclist 00:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. While it is true that Korsnäs in Dalecarlia now formally is a part of Falun, this is due to the rather large new merged Swedish municipalities; and when it was listed as an independent unit (as in Svensk Uppslagsbok), it contained about 1400 inhabitants.JoergenB 19:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

• Could the listed or other company be name with a similar level of usage? It is the first result on a Google search. —Centrx→talk • 03:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

You mean this site? It can be put under Korsnäs Packaging. --TonyM 14:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Korsnäs AB is a paper mill of moderate size in Sweden and is of some recognition here in the Nordic countries (where there are litterally dozens other paper/pulp mills that are more famous), but I would say that the municipality of Korsnäs is more famous since it holds the record of being the most Swedish place on earth although it lies in Finland. MoRsΞ 20:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Edit war

There has been an edit war going on for some time regarding the Finnish name Ristitaipale. This name is again and again put in brackets right after Korsnäs in the article as an "old Finnish name". This case is to some extent comparable to that of Seinäjoki. This article does not begin "Seinäjoki (old Swedish name Östermyra)", which would be quite absurd, it rather explains that there historically was such a Swedish name which is hardly used at all today. "Ristitaipale" is apparently much less deeply rooted and even less used than "Östermyra", and of course it shouldn't possibly be treated in a more generous way than the old Swedish name for Seinäjoki. // 83.177.15.217 16:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

There is a small difference, Östermyra was the official name for a period of the town's history, albeit no longer used for the town itself (but in some other contexts, e.g. "Östermyra school", "Östermyra Swedish Association", "Östermyra-days" etc...), "Ristitaipale" on the other hand, has never had any sort of status, neither official, nor unofficial. I have been in contact with people from that area and they all say that it was only a suggested name - that it was never accepted into use. It is never used today except within Fennoman circles, who constantly try to erase Swedish history from Finland. (Also the "proof" that is given, i.e. the geneology-site, it works so that you can suggest corrections to the site, that sounds very suspicious to me, as if some of these pro-Ristitaipale individuals has done so. 192.176.237.2 17:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Bullshit, I have found many references where is standing Ristitaipale. And now you are try to cover it? --85.156.136.58 19:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

And where are these references which would prove a historical "common use" of the name? Besides that, there is absolutely no doubt that Ristitaipale is not used in any way today except by a few people who want to implement it on the internet for political reasons. The article on Seinäjoki should not begin "Seinäjoki (also called Östermyra in Swedish)", and Korsnäs should not begin "Korsnäs (also called Ristitaipale and Korsnääsi in Finnish)", because in neither case is the name in brackets in common use. // 83.177.15.217 22:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Do you know that both of them are in Finland and thats why both name has finnish name. Ristitaipale is pure finnsh name and because that municipality is in Finland, it should be also finnsh name to see. --85.156.136.58 09:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes I do know that Korsnäs and Seinäjoki are in Finland, I am from that area, but do YOU know that we also speak Swedish in Finland and do you know that Korsnäs is unilingual and that its name is "Korsnäs" both in Finnish and Swedish? Proof: (see #280). Ristitaipale is a fennoman invention. Likewise there are many municipalities in Finland that don't have a corresponding Swedish name.MoRsΞ 09:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

That answer by 85.156.136.58 was very revealing and rather comical, since it does not grasp what I wrote about Seinäjoki and Korsnäs at all, as anyone can see. My point was and is: there are municipalities in Finland without any Swedish name in common use (for example Seinäjoki, or Rovaniemi, or Kolari), and there are also some municipalities in Finland without any Finnish name in common use (for example Korsnäs, or Finström). // 83.177.120.84 11:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Korsnäs have a finnish name Ristitaipale, but you dont accept it, because you are swedish bättre folk (english better people). So because you want to destroy finnish names, I will now correct finnish city articles, where swedish name is too noticeable. --85.156.136.58 12:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)