Disputatio:Valentia
Latest comment: abhinc 13 annos by Andrew Dalby in topic De titulo
De titulo recensere
I reverted the move to Valentia (urbs). This move may or may not be a good thing, but it needed discussion. There are many incoming links to Valentia, and nearly all of them are to the city. This may be a sign that, to keep things simple, we should allow the city to have the simple headword. Other views? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:55, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
- I agree - I think Valentia should relate directly to the city, and then province, autonomous community and kingdom should be specified from a discretiva.--Xaverius 13:02, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
- On a second thought, we may want this to be Valentia (Hispania), as there are other Valentia (in Venezuela, and in France, Valence-sur-Rhône)--Xaverius 13:05, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
- I found the need for the chemical meaning, which is why I thought the move necessary. Everywhere else I've seen here, we put the discretiva at the simple title, so I followed that (and therefore didn't need the head note at the city's page). Pantocrator 14:28, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
- In fact we don't always make that choice. It's more like en:wiki: we decide whether one meaning of the word is preeminent or not (and it makes sense to look at the incoming links before deciding finally). In those cases, we put the discretiva page at xxxx (discretiva). Yes, we always aim to add the headnote. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:49, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
- Always? That's certainly not a policy on English. I suppose I should look at the incoming links, but how many does it take to make that decision? Pantocrator 14:59, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
- We're all housekeepers, but there aren't that many of us. If you're ready to change some of the links, and say so, others might be ready to go along with the page move you're suggesting.
- I feel a good aim, in this as in many other Vicipaedia things, is to make decisions that are good for the future, easy to apply, and cause least housework. If we can do all that, how happy we will be! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:26, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
- Always? That's certainly not a policy on English. I suppose I should look at the incoming links, but how many does it take to make that decision? Pantocrator 14:59, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
- In fact we don't always make that choice. It's more like en:wiki: we decide whether one meaning of the word is preeminent or not (and it makes sense to look at the incoming links before deciding finally). In those cases, we put the discretiva page at xxxx (discretiva). Yes, we always aim to add the headnote. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:49, 8 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
Now someone else tried to move the page, anonymously and without discussion, but just made a mess, because anonyms can't move pages. I reverted the mess, pro tempore. Personally I have no strong opinion on what this page should be called, but, as explained above, any move will require consideration and discussion. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:39, 31 Maii 2010 (UTC)