Talk:Ismayilli

Requested move 21 March 2021

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. Yes, accents or other diacritics are allowed per WP:DIACRITICS as long as their used in general from reliable English sources or are the common name from verified sources. And contrary to the RM initiator, the opposition has not demonstrated the use of "İsmayıllı" as the common name or presented its use in reliable sources. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 22:52, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

---

İsmayıllı → Ismayilli – Move to "Ismayilli" per WP:UE/WP:COMMONNAME/WP:ENGLISH. Proof of anglicized name being the common name:

Results from Google News: Ismayilli: 4,940 İsmayıllı: 7

Results from Google Scholar: Ismayilli: 346 İsmayıllı: 130

Individual reliable sources referring to city as Ismayilli: RFE/RL, EurasiaNet, Voice of America

This is the same name but an anglicized version. Unlike other small villages, this is a fairly large town, which has made a lot of appearances in English-language media, in most of which, "Ismayilli" has been used much more, establishing its WP:COMMONNAME. I'd also like to ask the closing admin to give more attention to the arguments being made rather than the vote counts, as there are people who go over each RM and repeat unrelated policies as an "Oppose" argument. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 16:31, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose same again - why replace the initial capital long i with capital short ı, and then replace short ı with long i when the proposed change redirects here anyway? We are used to long i and short ı in Turkish geo titles. This is a choice of en.wp relating to all Latin-alphabet geo articles. Lonely Planet uses full font, why can't we? Oh, we can and do. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

  We're not changing the name solely because it uses non-anglicized letters. The anglicized name is the common name as shown by a wide range of WP:RS and WP:GOOGLETEST provided above and Wikipedia policies and guidelines such as WP:UE, WP:ENGLISH and WP:COMMONNAME prefer an anglicized common name rather than an non-anglicized barely mentioned name. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 18:59, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:DIACRITICS.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

  Note that the user above has copy-pasted same comment mentioning a completely irrelevant policy to every single Requested Moves of mine.

  The first sentence from that policy:

  The use of modified letters (such as accents or other diacritics) in article titles is neither encouraged nor discouraged; when deciding between versions of a word which differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language (including other encyclopedias and reference works). The policy on using common names and on foreign names does not prohibit the use of modified letters, if they are used in the common name as verified by reliable sources.

  See above to know which name English language reliable sources use. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 20:46, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose per In Ictu Oculi. No such user (talk) 14:13, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support - I've voted on similar RMs before and there are always unrelated policies and M.O.S. issues repeated. This, to me, seems to be a commonname issue and I'm convinced by the sufficient sourcing provided by CuriousGolden that the anglicised name is the commonname. Gnominite (talk) 14:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support per sourcing brought up by nominator. I'll buy that this is the commonname given the substantially different hit counts, far above what might be the case merely for some lazy typesetting. (Canvassing disclaimer to closer: These RMs were brought up in the Wikipedia Discord.) SnowFire (talk) 00:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.