[Wikipedia-l] stupid anglicization

Thu Nov 21 08:30:28 UTC 2002

Christopher Mahan wrote:

>>I would also like to point out that we most certainly do not have
>>to worry about the reader finding the correct name (despite their
>>anglo-brainwashing), as Zoe and others have argued, because we have
>>#REDIRECT
>>
>Instead of a redirect, I would see a short article that explains that
>word "x" is the anglicised, or Americanized version of word "y", and
>to please see word "y" for more information on the subject, or look
>at the "x versus y" article that goes into the finer grain.
>
>If someone uses Peking as the capital of China, should it just
>rediect to Beijing (a different approximation), or rather explain
>that Peking was named such after the work of such and such scholar
>but was later acknowledged... so on and so forth.
>
This is certainly a reasonable alternative to redirects, but this 
explanation would rarely be more than a stub, so often (but not always) 
it would fit just as well in the first paragraph of the substantive article.

Eclecticology