Talk:Scandinavia/Archive 9
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Pincrete in topic "most commonly"?
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
"most commonly"?
The first paragraph currently states that in English usage, Scandinavia is "most commonly" used to refer to Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. This would seem to be WP:OR, or do we have a source with frequency analysis? Please note, I'm not making a comment on what Scandinavia is (we've done that to death for over a decade on this talk page), merely on whether we can state what usage is "most common". Jeppiz (talk) 10:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- The source used in the opening sentence (Oxford Dictionaries) says "A cultural region consisting of the countries of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark and sometimes also of Iceland, Finland, and the Faroe Islands." "Sometimes also" meaning it is less common to include the last three, that's how I'm interpreting that at least. TylerBurden (talk) 11:41, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but that seems to be to use a source related to accuracy to make a claim about frequency, wouldn't you agree? I'm sure we both agree with the definition of Oxford Dictionaries, but my impression is that the wider usage is every bit as common. Obviously my impression is not something to include (would be wildly WP:OR) but it would probably be better to use the wording of the source rather than to make unsupported claims about frequency. It's a small detail, with no real change in how readers will read, but just to make sure we represent sources accurately. Jeppiz (talk) 15:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- I wouldn't mind if it was changed to reflect the source more specifically, feel free to edit it. TylerBurden (talk) 11:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but that seems to be to use a source related to accuracy to make a claim about frequency, wouldn't you agree? I'm sure we both agree with the definition of Oxford Dictionaries, but my impression is that the wider usage is every bit as common. Obviously my impression is not something to include (would be wildly WP:OR) but it would probably be better to use the wording of the source rather than to make unsupported claims about frequency. It's a small detail, with no real change in how readers will read, but just to make sure we represent sources accurately. Jeppiz (talk) 15:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't see a problem - the majority of English dicts and encycs and similar, use the 'English' definition, ie "most commonly"= most Eng sources. In one sense it is superfluous since obviously the definition used on Eng WP will be that ordinarily used in English. The phrasing exists to allow for the secondary point of information, that there is a 'stricter' definition used in the region and by some Eng sources. I think it is informative to say - as we do - that English speakers have 'got it wrong' somewhat. I think this is an instance where WP:IAR applies in the interests of clarity. I don't see a problem but am open to other phrasing which is equally clear and informative.Pincrete (talk) 04:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Pincrete, I pretty much agree with all you say. The pedant in me needs to point out that it's not that English speakers 'got it wrong' but rather that (in English), "we" often get it wrong ;-) This is far from the only example of different languages using the same name for at least partially different regions. Many languages use Asia for the entire continent though the original 'correct' usage is restricted to Anatolia. In Swedish, we use Storbritannien to refer to the 'United Kingdom', and that usage is also 'wrong' in that 'Great Britain' is the main island of the United Kingdom, not the country. Numerous other examples abound. I mention this as, throughout the years, I've seen so often the discussion circle around 'English usage is wrong', when it should be 'English usage is somewhat different to ours' (common usage, that is; as the article makes clear, English encyclopaedias do tend to favour a definition more or less identical to our (Swedish) understanding of the word. Jeppiz (talk) 20:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)