Wikipedia

Talk:Embassy of the United Kingdom, Pyongyang

Latest comment: 6 years ago by Amakuru in topic Requested move 6 September 2017
Learn more about this page

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Embassy of the United Kingdom, Pyongyang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:50, 23 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 6 September 2017 edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago9 comments8 people in discussion
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: Not moved. There is a consensus against this proposal. If someone wants to suggest an alternative based on what was discussed, please feel free to open a new RM.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:35, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply


– "[The] Embassy of the United Kingdom, Pyongyang" as a name is clearly American English; and it would have only been correct English (in Britain) to speak of a "British Embassy, Pyongyang" if the late HM had had established an Embassy in Pyongyang before the start of the Second World War...in the same way that the British Forces stationed in then West Germany and now in Germany (GFR/FRG/BRD) are called "British Forces Germany", not "British Forces, Germany"! There is really no particularly valid reason to somehow insist upon that (what is effectively) American English (and incorrect English in the United Kingdom) be used even for the names of British high commissions, deputy high commissions, embassies, consulates-general and consulates and other British consular posts, but not say e.g. the names of units (however constituted) of the three primary branches of the British Armed Forces. (And, I think, here in the UK, if you insist (and persist) upon putting in a comma like that, and you are not actually from the U.S. or Canada, people might think that you might have some bizarre speech impediment like bloody King George VI, or you might be just a bit "of the Spectrum" (an autistic, with Aspergers)!) 87.102.116.36 (talk) 07:37, 6 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

  • Oppose partly:
    1. Consistency would certainly be good: either "Embassy of the United Kingdom" or "British Embassy" but not both. I'm not sure which: on the one hand, they really are embassies of the United Kingdom, not of Britain (there is a difference) – every embassy or high commission has the UK arms on the outside and flies the UK flag – but on the other hand, the government itself calls them British embassies – see British Embassy Pyongyang etc. (on gov.uk).
    2. I oppose removing the comma, however, because this is an encyclopedia. Even though the government itself leaves it out as mentioned above, removing the comma wouldn't make the title clearer, rather the opposite. I don't understand the OP's claim that a comma is un-English or implies a speech impediment (!) – commas are completely normal in writing addresses on one line, in the UK as elsewhere, and "British Embassy, Pyongyang" is analagous to an address.
    — Stanning (talk) 11:27, 6 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
    • Regarding point #1, "British" here is simply the demonym for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I believe it's widely understood, and probably the more common meaning than "associated with the island of Great Britain". --Paul_012 (talk) 01:46, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose removal of comma. It would make the title unclear and ambigious. No oppinion on British vs. UK. Renata (talk) 12:57, 6 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment: I think there may be slight difference in meaning depending on the inclusion of the comma. British Embassy, Pyongyang sounds like its name is just "British Embassy", and it just happens to be situated in Pyongyang. British Embassy Pyongyang sounds like it's the official branch name of that particular embassy. Much like how King's College London is the name of that particular institution, while the name of King's College, Cambridge is actually just "King's College", with the Cambridge part only included for disambiguation. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:01, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose as proposed, but weak support for format Embassy of the United Kingdom in Warsaw and British High Commission in Wellington. First, "British Embassy Washington" is barely grammatical. Examining e.g. Category:Diplomatic missions in Washington, D.C., we see that a common (not universal, though) and sensible format is "Embassy of <country> in <city>". I'm not particularly bothered by the current comma, either, but I grant that it does sound a bit like disambiguator – "Embassy of the United Kingdom" is not the full name. No such user (talk) 13:59, 5 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose too many problems already mentioned to support this proposal. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:15, 11 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose due to all reasons stated above. Holland85 (talk) 03:24, 12 September 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.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Embassy_of_the_United_Kingdom,_Pyongyang&oldid=1201741916"