Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SteveStrummer (talk | contribs) at 19:02, 14 March 2015 (Removing this flagrant effort at intimidation: this page is NOT protected and ArbCom has NEVER commented on its status at all.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Ukraine High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Energy Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Mining Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 22 February 2015

This discussion was ] on Error: Invalid time.. The result of the move review was closure endorsed.

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston (talk) 15:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Per a request, I'm expanding my closing rationale, per a discussion at a discussion at User talk:EdJohnston.

WP:COMMONNAME trumps the view that, by picking Donbass as the name, we are choosing between Russian and Ukrainian views of the situation. An editor claimed to see political significance in this closure. In my view, politics plays no role. We just need to determine what name is most commonly used in English, and be sure there is no uncertainty in what 'Donbass' refers to. It is ironic that the former article was titled 'Donetsk basin' but then used the word Donbass consistently in the article text when referring to the subject. EdJohnston (talk) 01:17, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Donets Basin → Donbass – This article should be moved for a few reasons. For one, "Donbass" is the common name for this place in English, as shown by Google Ngrams. Google shows 8,680,000 hits for "Donbass", 1,220,000 for "Donbas", and only 103,000 for "Donets Basin". Secondly, "Donbass" is much more WP:CONCISE than the present title, and also more naturally what the reader would type into the search bar, per WP:NATURALNESS. It is also true that use of "Donets Basin" tends to be limited in use to the coal-ming area geological area, whereas "Donbass" is a cultural and historical region that has a wider scope. Note that the Russian Misplaced Pages has two articles on the subject, one for "Donbass" as a cultural region, and one for "Donets Coal Basin" as a narrow-scoped geological area. This article is about the wider-scoped entity. All of our title criteria suggest using "Donbass". RGloucester — ☎ 20:35, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose: Google hits alone do not dictate article titles. "Donets Basin" is the well-known English name for the region, while "Donbas" and "Donbass" are both mere abbreviations, one in Ukrainian and the other in Russian. At eleven characters and four syllables, "Donets Basin" is not a case for WP:CONCISE, and being the only name not in a foreign language, it's not a case for WP:NATURALNESS. It is, however, the clear winner of WP:PRECISION – that's surely part of the reason it's still used by Britannica and Columbia encyclopedias, as well as common English-language textbooks. Given the region's current turmoil, there is now a large spike in internet usage of the Ukrainian and Russian names – as well as an odd but notable spike in "Donbass" redirects on WP, since the last move request – but that is not reason enough to change the name here. Misplaced Pages cannot be the first encyclopedic source to make a call like this: if we change this longstanding article title, it will be tantamount to promoting a preferred usage. SteveStrummer (talk) 00:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I did not say that "Google hits alone dictate article titles". Nonetheless, WP:UCN is policy. We are not like other encyclopedias, in that respect. We do not use official names or formalisms. We use the names that are commonly used. Misplaced Pages precisely CAN be the first tertiary source to use this title. There is no reason why it cannot. "Donbass" is clearly not in a "foreign language", anymore than "Paris" is in a foreign language. It is accepted in the English language as a topographical name, as demonstrated by the myriad books and newspapers that use it. It is the common and concise name. There is nothing less precise about "Donbass". In fact, I'd argue that "Donets Basin" is overly precise, precisely because it is generally used to refer specifically to the geological basin, rather than to the cultural region. This is demonstrated by the fact that books about the historical region use "Donbass". This article is about the cultural region. RGloucester — ☎ 01:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

• Question. What are exactly the new arguments for restarting this move request? Beagel (talk) 17:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The last one was seven months ago. "Donbass" is now even more common than it was then. I believe that the case was clear then, but it is even more clear now. The present title is incorrect and not widely used, and there is no reason not to use the more concise, common, and natural title. RGloucester — ☎ 17:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose per #Requested move 2014 ; we should not choose between Russian and Ukrainian in a region in armed dispute between a Russian invasion and Ukranian defence. The proposed title would favour Russian claims to the region over Ukrainian ones, making it seem like Misplaced Pages supports Russian sovereignty over the region. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 06:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Nonsense. We are choosing between neither Russian or Ukrainian. We are choosing the English common name, as demanded by our policies, just as with Kiev (Russian-derived, rather than Ukrainian-derived "Kyiv") or Odessa (Russian-derived, rather than Ukrainian-derived "Odesa"). What's more, tons of Ukrainians speak Russian. Using words derived from Russian, a language that is as common in Kiev as it is in Donbass, has nothing to do with "Russian sovereignty". The Russian language is not the property of the Russian state. RGloucester — ☎ 06:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

• agree with nominator. donbass always using in sources, never donets basin. nominator user provide good sources. frequent name is donbass. in japanese we call itドンバス donbasu. we got that fron english. use name that is common. Togashi Yuuta (talk) 05:20, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

• Support per nom but I feel that opponents squeamishness about "choosing (linguistic) sides" is well-intentioned. If this move succeeds, there will likely be a round of Donbas/Donbass RM discussions to follow. —  AjaxSmack  07:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
• support: region is called donbass. never heard of this donets basin before i come to this from donbass civil war article. source is provided in german news: http://www.dw.de/opinion-echoes-of-donbass-in-moscows-streets/a-18286515 This name is shit

• Support as proposed. Common English usage is clear here. It's not a question of "taking sides", just pure unadulterated WP:COMMONNAME.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:21, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class Ukraine articles
• High-importance Ukraine articles
• WikiProject Ukraine articles
• Start-Class energy articles
• Low-importance energy articles
• Start-Class Mining articles
• Mid-importance Mining articles
• WikiProject Mining articles
• Closed move reviews