This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on the Oriental Orthodox Church on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Oriental OrthodoxyWikipedia:WikiProject Oriental OrthodoxyTemplate:WikiProject Oriental OrthodoxyOriental Orthodoxy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Church of the Holy Mother of God (Aleppo) is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArmeniaWikipedia:WikiProject ArmeniaTemplate:WikiProject ArmeniaArmenian articles
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: no consensus There were divided opinions as whether page should be moved. I'd leave the page as it is and encourage an RfC to determine general consensus on issues like this as Amakuru stated. Cheers! ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 12:46, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per WP:ATDIS: we prefer natural, comma, and parenthetic disambiguation in descending order, with parenthetic as a last choice, especially for locations. — SMcCandlish☏¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 01:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. Comma disambiguation by location is strongly preferred and gels nicely with COMMONNAME where many things and places are titled with ", <place>". --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:07, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. As far as I can see we commonly disambiguate churches using parens. This is not a place or location, it is a building. Jenks24 (talk) 09:58, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We don't use comma disambiguation, except for places (per WP:NCPLACE). This is not a place, so criterion #2 of WP:ATDIS does not apply. It is a structure, and in general structures should use paranthetical disambiguation like any other entity on Wikipedia. — Amakuru (talk) 16:38, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Revert back to its original title. Please, can editors stop alleging that we don't use comma disambiguation for buildings and structures. This is complete and utter drivel without any basis in Wikipedia usage. We use both. Always have done. The only definites are that North America uses parentheses and Commonwealth countries generally use commas. Anywhere else is up for discussion and usually follows the version that has most commonly been used for that country in the past. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:11, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Attempting to shut down validly-held opinions on this issue is hardly the best way to proceed. I think we probably need an RFC to discuss this issue because it seems to have come up several times in the past few months, and it should be clear by now that there are many editors who don't support the apparent status quo for Commonwealth structures. — Amakuru (talk) 10:11, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not attempting to shut down anything. You were the one who made the incorrect claim that "we don't use comma disambiguation"! A handful of editors (mostly from outside the Commonwealth) have expressed the same opinion as you, not "many". At least as many have expressed the same opinion as me. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:41, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I don't think this contradicts any guideline, but if it does the guideline should change. The comma is natural disambiguation in this case (and I would guess many similar) and preferred. Andrewa (talk) 00:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The name of the church is "Church of the Holy Mother of God", not "Church of the Holy Mother of God, Aleppo" and the parenthetical indicates that the "Aleppo" part is specifically for disambiguation purposes and not to be rendered as part of its name. This is not not a locality, so WP:COMMADIS does not apply. --Tavix(talk) 19:53, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Clear natural disambiguation. Think, how would this be written on a list of churches? Would it be written "Church of the Holy Mother of God, Aleppo" or "Church of the Holy Mother of God (Aleppo)"? The answer is clearly the former. That's how people generally write things as a shorthand, whether they're buildings or cities. They use commas; they certainly don't use parentheses. I have no idea why the parenthetical usage for structures crept onto Wikipedia (and note, it's not universal, as stated above), but it's completely unnecessary and is not natural disambiguation. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:06, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It would be written "Church of the Holy Mother of God" because that is the name of the church. If you can provide evidence showing common usage of "Church of the Holy Mother of God, Aleppo", then you may have a point. --Tavix(talk) 17:08, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously if one was only talking about Aleppo it would. But if one was listing churches throughout the world, one would write "Church of the Holy Mother of God, Aleppo" (since it's not the only church in the world by that name; hence our need to disambiguate it in the first place!). One would almost certainly not write "Church of the Holy Mother of God (Aleppo)". In the real world that is. Hence natural disambiguation. If you can provide evidence showing common usage of "Church of the Holy Mother of God (Aleppo)", then you may have a point! -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:24, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we are talking about Aleppo. The name of the church is "Church of the Holy Mother of God", but since this isn't the only church with the name, a disambiguator is needed to signify this is the one in Aleppo. WP:NATURAL states: Using an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English reliable sources (emphasis mine). If you're going to claim WP:NATURAL, you are going to need sources to back up your argument. Otherwise we will have to default to parenthetical disambiguation per WP:ATDAB. --Tavix(talk) 14:38, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good grief, you really need to fully read and understand what other editors write before replying... And what is so difficult to understand in the sentences Comma-separated disambiguation is sometimes also used in other contexts and Wikipedia's standard disambiguation technique when none of the other solutions lead to an optimal article title? I certainly don't read that as: We never use comma disambiguation except in place names and I'm rather puzzled that you seem to. What WP:ATDAB most certainly does not do is mandate parenthetical disambiguation except in a set and unchangeable list of exceptions. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:50, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comma-separated disambiguation is sometimes also used in other contexts, such as royals and nobles. Wikipedia's standard disambiguation technique when none of the other solutions lead to an optimal article title Yes, that's what I'm saying. We still don't have evidence of an unambiguous WP:NATURAL title and WP:COMMADAB doesn't automatically apply because it makes itself clear that it is for place names (with the exception noted earlier). What WP:ATDAB most certainly does not do is mandate parenthetical disambiguation except in a set and unchangeable list of exceptions. I would agree with that, and so would WP:ATDAB. Parenthetical disambiguation is to be used when there isn't a WP:NATURAL way to disambiguate (arguing that comma disambiguation is a specific example of NATURAL). --Tavix(talk) 16:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, using comma in this instance is pure contrivance. The name of the subject is "Church of the Holy Mother of God" not "Church of the Holy Mother of God, Aleppo". No evidence has been provided that it is known by such a name. Where it is necessary to arbitrarily append a term for disambiguation, the claim of natural disambiguation poly makes sense when reliable sources use that construction. Otherwise it is better to use parenthetical disambiguation to make clear the artifice of the term. older ≠ wiser 23:18, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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.
.svg){kind=small}
