Talk:People's Union (Belgium)

Requested move 10 September 2020

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: No consensus: neither supporters and opposers of this move have provided much evidence as to which form of the name is more common in English language sources, per WP:COMMONNAME/WP:USEENGLISH. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 00:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

---

People's Union (Belgium) → Volksunie – I am quite surprised that this has not been discussed before. The rationale for having English-language names for Belgian political parties has generally been their bilingual nature which is not an issue here. Volksunie is clearly the WP:COMMONNAME and is also a WP:NATURALDIS of the title. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC) —Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:06, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• Our policy is to title articles as commonly used in English language sources, which can sometimes mean the foreign language name and sometimes the English translation. I'm happy to support this, but are you able to share any evidence that the Flemish name is more common than the translation in English sources? Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 22:55, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
  • That's not strictly true. WP:NCPARTY states that we should use the local name unless there is widespread common usage of the English name. As you can see on Google Books, there is plenty of English use of the Dutch language title. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Which line says that?--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:56, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
      • "The title used in reliable English-language sources both inside and outside the political party's country [...] should be preferred." Ergo, that's the Dutch version in this context. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:27, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
        • That seems to be pretty much exactly what I said in my comment.--Yaksar (let's chat) 01:04, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
          • Yes, I think I put a bit too much emphasis on the next line: "Plaid Cymru, Bloc Québécois, Likud, Kadima, and Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami are used because their English translations are rarely used even in the English-language media, either inside or outside the country" but I take your point. Either way, Belgian political parties are not so discussed in English that they are really able to generate a common name. The link (and a basic search of google) illustrates that "People's Union" does not have any serious currency in English. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:14, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 13:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:USEENGLISH. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:50, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

  Can you please provide some evidence of the "established use" of People's Union in English? Google Books shows "People's Union" invariably being used only to translate the Dutch term which is also cited. Otherwise any argument based on WP:USEENGLISH is redundant.—Brigade Piron (talk) 15:27, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:USEENGLISH – as long as Volksunie continues to redirect to the article, I don't see why we need to rename the article.--Autospark (talk) 14:45, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

  See above. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

• There seems to be an incorrect understanding of WP:USEENGLISH in both !votes above -- again, our policy is not to simply use the English translated title, but rather to use whatever form is most common in English language sources, which may very well be the English name but may also be the original language.--Yaksar (let's chat) 01:03, 23 September 2020 (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.