Talk:America/Archive 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

America → America (disambiguation) — This is an English-language site, and America in English most commonly refers to the United States. Thus, this page should be moved to America (disambiguation), and this article should redirect to the United States. Also, the continents are North and South America, or collectively the Americas, not America. — Black Harry (T|C) 15:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support per nom. Joie de Vivre 15:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose A quick glance at Talk:Americas shows quite a lot of people who think otherwise and would rather see Americas moved to this name -- that is a major factor in why this is a disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 15:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Strong oppose per O≠W. As well, take a glance at any dictionary entry for America, and you will note that multiple senses are invariably listed (including the USA, which is sense 3 in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary link above) and a number of entries for 'x America' exist – this DAB should be no different. Corticopia 15:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. Two dictionary definitions describe "America" as primarily meaning "The United States": Collins dictionary, American Heritage dictionary. Both of these describe the secondary usage—referring to the two continents together—as "The Americas" (not "America"), just as the nom said. Relatedly; Reference.com does as well. Joie de Vivre 17:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment And my volume of the New Oxford Dictionary of English harks of the entry in M-W: 'Americas' sense first, 'USA' second (p. 53). My point is this: given the multiple senses of the word, there's little reason to move this to America (disambiguation). Let me put it another way: the 'United States of America' may be prevalent but it is not the only 'America', with the first part 'United States (of)' modifying 'America' just as much as 'North', 'South', 'Central', 'Anglo-', et al. do in their respective senses. Corticopia 17:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. Consider what you would think if someone told you this: "My grandparents sailed to America when they were only 19 and 20." What would you think they meant? Joie de Vivre 17:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment That's just it: I'd ask them to clarify what they meant. Corticopia 17:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. Please see my reply in the Discussion section. Joie de Vivre 17:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Where is this conversation taking place? Brazil? Peru? -Acjelen 17:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Super-duper strong oppose to any moves, renamings, etc. to America, Americas, and America (disambiguation) for reasons discussed at length, from various positions, and differing levels of tact on this very talk page (well, now in the archives). -Acjelen 16:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose per it being unproductive and inflammatory. Dictionaries and Encyclopaedias treat it as ambigious, we should as well. We're not here to correct usage but merely reflect it. WilyD 17:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Though "Dictionaries and Encyclopaedias (sic) treat it as ambigious" Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia and the ability to have "A 'See also' section stating that further information on the topic is available on the page of a closely related topic may be preferable." Black Harry (T|C) 18:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I was unclear. I meant to imply that the spirit of WP:V and WP:NOR is called for here. Verifiable, reliable sources are better judges than our biases and anecdotes. WilyD 18:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support - Looking at usage, I doubt that people who look up America in an encylcopedia aren't looking for the US primarily (I wish we had stats on how often each of the dab links were clicked!) I'm not from the US, and the people who often have the "super strong opposer" attitude I've met in real life to this kind of thing are generally trying to preach that America isn't just the US. I agree with the editor who suggested Wikipedia isn't to teach, I'd suggest to go directly to the article on the US since it's not our place to try to convince others how wrong they are to look up the US by typing in America. Try doing some google searches and you'll see America shows up in the US sense tens or hundreds of thousands of times more often than the others. --Cheers, Komdori 18:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose America was named as such in 1507. The United States didn't come along for another few hundred years. Noel S McFerran 19:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

No, the Americas (North and South) were named in 1507. America, is short for United States of America. Besides, why does when something was named effect common usage? Black Harry (T|C) 20:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

See the map on the right to see that you're wrong. The Americas were named America in 1507 - usage later evolved.

And even if he is, it of course doesn't matter since Wikipedia goes by common usage. Maybe you could point out the part of the naming policy that has to do with naming according to "teaching people what's right." Or should we go rename New York City to New Amsterdam since it had that name first? 128.205.33.79 21:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Not at all - you'll find I regularly revert people who replace references the Americas with America. The naming policy has to do with where articles are located - in this case, there's a detailed rational at United States as to why it's at that name and not any other (see it's talk) and Americas isn't going anywhere either. As for what's "right", obviously America should mean the States but that's not always how it's used, and often enough it's otherwise (mis)used that a disambig here makes sense. We keep "America" as a disambig precisely because we're not interested in imposing "correct" usage on people, just using actual usage. WilyD 21:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose The word "America" is ambiguous enough that it should be disambiguated here. It has nothing to do with who's right and who's wrong, it's simply that there are multiple uses of the word, and both are prominent enough that disambiguation is desireable.--Cúchullain ^t/c 06:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support Even though I doubt consensus will ever be reached for a move. Some contributors are so bull-headed that they won't even admit that America being used to describe the United States is common enough to warrant it being listed first on the disambig page.--RWR8189 00:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I realize consensus won't be reached because instead of making this a debate over common usage, they want to accuse me of making inflammatory redirects and alienating non-English speakers on an English-Language Encyclopedia. And even when they talk about common usage, they consider it to be original research. Black Harry 14:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

• Support I am extremely doubtful that the use of America to refer to anything other than the United States is at all common in English. This is the English Wikipedia, not the Please-the-Entire-World Wikipedia. The Spanish Wikipedia, to name one, is perfectly free to define America as a single large continent containing what are called, in English, North America and South America, as indeed it does, and I would oppose any English speaker who attempted to force change upon them. Similarly, there is no reason to allow people whose native language is not English to force the English Wikipedia to use terms in ways that accord with their preferences. --Tkynerd 14:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Explain, then, why numerous English dictionaries, e.g., list multiple senses (no matter the order) for 'America' and not just the USA? Corticopia 15:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Because, as I think is obvious to most people, it is the job of dictionaries to document all senses in which a word is used. My comment addressed the frequency of use in different senses, which is a different matter. Also, different dictionaries place the various senses in different orders, so that's not a reliable guide to anything. (ISTR that the OED, for example, lists the senses in the chronological order in which the word began to be used in English in each sense -- nothing to do with current frequency of use in each sense.) --Tkynerd 16:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
      • So, what you're saying is that your reasoning about the frequency of usage is predicated on personal belief -- after all, you did indicate you were doubtful about usage of 'America' to mean something other than the USA, despite volumes and indications below which directly contradict that. I mean: the Britannica entry for 'America' could easily have redirected the reader to 'United States of America' instead of 'Americas'. Corticopia 17:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
        • You misunderstand me (and much else). I made clear in my original opposing post above that this was my own best understanding of the situation, which is not the same thing as a point of view in the Wikipedia sense, a term you are misusing here to attempt to paint me as biased (and yourself as unbiased), which could be construed as a personal attack. As for the "volumes and indications," they're nothing more than opinions and wishful thinking clouded by familiarity with languages other than English -- not relevant to the appropriate practices of an English-language encyclopedia. --Tkynerd 21:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
          • Your (understanding) and mine, throughout, are points of view. You made clear in your original posting what you believed to be the case, just as I have -- I have corroborated mine, however. Anyhow, what other volumes do is precisely of relevance here, since they contradict your understanding and, possibly, wishful thinking. I can't and won't comment regarding your other points. Corticopia 21:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
            • Your "corroboration" consists of citations from single works that cannot be assumed to reflect English usage in general. And of course our different understandings of this issue are points of view in the ordinary sense, but not in the Wikipedia sense, as I made clear above. Your unwillingness to address my other points is noted. --Tkynerd 23:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Heh, heh -- making counterfactual claims seem to be a staple on Wikipedia discussion pages (not to speak of the articles themselves). older ≠ wiser 15:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
      • Comment Counterfactual -- me? I don't understand. :) Corticopia 15:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

        To claim that it is uncommon to use America to refer to anything other than the U.S. in English is demonstrably false, hence, counterfactual. BTW, my comment was in response to Tkynerd, not you Corticopia. older ≠ wiser 16:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

        • OK. :) Corticopia 17:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
        • "Demonstrably"? Still waiting for the QED, and preferably one not constructed of hastily grasped straws. --Tkynerd 21:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
        • As for dictionaries, I would look at them a bit differently than encyclopedias. Someone often looks up a single word there, and might be looking up part of a phrase (knowing what South means, but not knowing America in general). To confront the issue more head on, can you provide some evidence (perhaps some simple Google searches) that most of the time (or even say, half the time) in English pages the word America alone does not refer to the US? I expect you'll find that far in excess of 90% of the time it does refer just that way. Most places in the English speaking world (I live in the US now, but haven't always), whether you hear "I hate America" or "I can't wait to take a trip this summer to America," it's perfectly clear what is meant. Think of the dab page as a person with whom you are speaking--if you say America, most people jump to concluding US, not ask you what you meant. As I mentioned somewhere else, sure, print encyclopedias need a manual redirect and list all possibilities to save time (since the main article clearly belongs in the U section), but we don't need to do that here since it just means one extra click to the dab page if you wind up at the US page accidently. --Cheers, Komdori 15:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
          • Perhaps you've nailed it on the head. I can't say how someone would respond or what they are referring to when uttering 'America'; I would ask for more specificity. For instance: there are 71.3 million online instances of 'United States of America', but 261M for 'North America' -- more than 3x as many -- 129M for 'South America', 153M for 'Latin America', et al. I will say this: when I consult my edition of Encyclopædia Britannica (the hard copy of which I was graced with years ago), it indicates this (v. 1, p 325):
            • Of course those aren't counting America being used by itself to refer to "North America," they are counting when the user types in the phrase "North America". I agree that North America should not redirect to the US, of course. By that logic, North should go to the dab page (which lists North America) rather than going straightaway to the North article. --Cheers, Komdori 22:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
            • America (Western Hemsiphere): see Americas --Corticopia 15:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

If you apply teh google to America - you get:

1. United States
2. Americas
3. America (Band)
4. America (Fashion Designer)
5. A (film company)
6. United States
7. United States
8. "America" (poem)
9. America (2002 movie)
10. America (Catholic Newsletter)
11. United States

• • • • • • Anyways, this goes on quite a bit, and we all know that google isn't a great reference (since most english speakers have very limited internet access, even if most anglophones have good access). It's a simply application of the dictionary see here. Look, refering to the Americas as America is patently offensive, but it's widespread - that's simply the way it is. We're not here to correct that. WilyD 15:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You failed to mention that the first two results you found were both links to Wikipedia. After those you get the band America, America's Library (US), AOL, America's Homepage (Plymouth, MA), and a Jesuit Magazine published in the US. Black Harry 15:52, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't provide any context, although using ghits to decide usage is a terrible plan anyways. The point was the even a terrible plan, biased towards getting the States gave only a plurality of the top hits - I'm sure not going to count all the many millions of hits for America the google gives - I also skipped the two or three "North America"s that were in the top ten and the like. WilyD 15:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Might be worth noting that searching for America "United States", which gets you listings like www.americaslibrary.gov returns back a whopping 752 million, far outweighing anything else. As for you being confused when people say phrases like, "I can't wait to visit America this summer," or "America always tries to police the world," I might suggest that I've observed this phenomenon only from a tiny group of English speakers (mostly the few non-native speaking South Americans). While I don't want to rely on anecdotes, the simple Google search seems to back that up. --Cheers, Komdori 16:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

It should also be noted that search engines will never separate multiple hits on the same site. Therefore, the first result was the United States article here. Because of this it list Americas here as its second result; indented to show that the article are on the same site. Black Harry 16:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

And for you limeys out there, a BBC search's top results all refer to the US of A. Black Harry 16:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

And not leaving out all my Aussie friends, a webwombat.au search's top results all refer to the United States.Black Harry 16:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose for the same reasons as Cuchullain Thehalfone 20:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. The ambiguity in the name "America" is salient enough—and people get exercised enough about it—that it's better that the article "America" be a disambiguation page than a redirect to either United States or Americas. AJD 22:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

• The central problem with having America redirect anywhere but here is the presence of two, opposed, unwavering camps. For many people in the United States, the meaning of "America" is clear and the idea that the word might have another definition would be suprising, shocking, and even angering. Moreover, it is common in the United States to think of North America and South America as two separate entities not requiring a label together. The other camp has the opposite position, with the definition of "America" equally clear and sensible; and its other use equally angering and even insulting (though not surprising). Keeping this page here preserves the neutral point of view required by Wikipedia policy. -Acjelen 17:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Well put. Corticopia 17:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

This is almost exactly right - the only inaccuracy is the assigning to Americans reactions that are also common among Canadians, for instance. WilyD 17:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Really? I am Canadian and I wouldn't think so. While "America" is derived from American usage, I don't think it's used as often as "the States", due to the potential ambiguity and the fact that we are both part of North America. But you may be right. –Pomte 03:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, my day-to-day usage is "Americans come from the (United) States" - but I'd vehemently deny that I'm an American, and I'd walk away from (or Jersey!) anyone who pushed the point too much. WilyD 03:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

• I understand that the word America is used in conjunction with other words: South America, Central America, Anglo-America. However, if you remove the prefix and look only at the word America, does the word refer to any of these things? How do you usually hear people use the word "America"? The other meanings always involve hyphenating the word. The word America, on its own, refers to the United States. Joie de Vivre 17:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• The word America is used to refer to the Americas - just about every source about it will mention this. Latin Americans feel particularly strongly about this - and although I find it bizarre, given the implications, it does seem to be the case. I asked a Chilean co-worker about continents and he identified America as one of the five continents. Of course, myself and my (real) American officemate were surprised - but the evidence that this usage is widespread is abundant. WilyD 17:55, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

And can we assume, WilyD, that you were having this conversation with your Chilean co-worker in English? -Acjelen 17:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah - Je parle seulement Anglais. WilyD 18:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• In Korea and I believe Japan, too, the word is actually just a transliterated version of America for the United States. Speakers from Asia generally wind up using this word for it when they learn English, just like virtually all Americans. I know there is a borderline militant (no one here I'm sure, no ruffled feathers please) group of people who like to say all you Americans and Indians and Asians and British are wrong, but sorry, outside of Latin America it's kind of rare, and I don't see those people as forming anywhere close to a significant portion of English speakers. In most places in the world if they ask where you took your summer holiday and you respond "America," you won't get a puzzled look asking you to specify. Since the only people who really care about this issue are those who want to preach their position that "you all are saying it wrong," my guess is the move will fail, and they can keep their dab page as a tacit reminder to all the hundreds of millions of English speaking schoolkids and adults alike who make the grave error of typing America to mean the US that there is a small but vocal portion of the world who use it for another purpose. --Cheers, Komdori 18:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• There's a lot more to it than this. I've been very vocal in my condemnation of using America to mean the Americas and American to mean Pan-American - but I also see why this is the correct solution for this issue. It's a straightforward issue that America is sometimes used to mean the Americas and we really can't quantify how much this is - but every dictionary and encyclopaedia thinks it's enough that it warrents prominant mention. We really have no idea what percentage of users who enter America into the search box mean the States, and how many mean the Americas. WilyD 19:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• I agree it would be awfully nice to know who clicked where, it might help discussions like this. That being said, even if we did move the page, we can still have such a prominent mention at the top of the page that "America redirected there, and to see other usages of the word click here." Paper encyclopedias don't really have that ability. Another thing to keep in mind--paper books can't do this kind of redirect. They have to choose a place to actually print the article, which clearly should be all the way over in volume U for US. They therefore have a choice--at America just put "see US" or give a bigger dab like we have. In the interest of common sense they have to put everything there "just in case." We don't--we can resolve to US and give a notice that there are some other meanings, too. I don't want to get in a huge google debate with anyone, but simple searches really do show that in most cases America is used as US. --Cheers, Komdori 19:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Conceded:The word America is used to refer to everything on this disambiguation page, that's why they're listed here. I suggest, though, that that fact doesn't have a significant impact on the decision. Imperialism aside, America is usually used to refer to the U.S.A. in English speaking America (pick your usage, the U.S. is populous enough to skew the results.) I would be mollified if the disambiguation page moved the Americas down the list, possibly to Other places. Would this proposal have a chance at consensus? Gruber76 15:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

• How about this: Since the word Columbia was once a well established nickname for the USA, why not move the article Colombia to Colombia (South American Country) then, we redirect Colombia to Columbia (disambiguation). It would follow the logic of having America as a disambig page, and not redirecting to the United States of America. Black Harry 16:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
  • This would create inordinate and unnecessary confusion, or more than there might be through the usual confusion of Colo-/Colu-. Corticopia 16:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, but it follows some of the same logic opponents of my proposal have made. Black Harry 16:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
      • In that case we won't do it per the principles laid out in WP:POINT. Apart from that, it also isn't comparable ; a dictionary definition of Colombia gives exactly one answer. Columbia has several dictionary definitions and is a disambiguation page. So, in fact, we see Columbia is being treated exactly the same as America is already ... WilyD 17:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
      • Actually, it doesn't. Colombia (the country) is known ubiquitously as that; the USA is known by numerous names (e.g., United States). Columbia is the USA personified (among other things) and a sometimes used poetic name. America is used in many senses and respects. Corticopia 17:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
        • Well much like Colombia and Columbia are spelled differently, so are America and Americas. or America and North/South America. Black Harry 17:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
          • No: apples and oranges – one is a plural form (Americas), the other is not (America); one contains modifiers (North/South America, etc.), the other does not (America). Columbia and Colombia are different, but both derived from Christopher Columbus. Corticopia 17:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
          • But America is very demonstratably spelt America commonly, whereas Colombia never spelt Columbia (and vice versa). As much as I take exception to the politics of people who do this - they're not a trivial number. WilyD 18:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Actually, if the District obtained statehood as Columbia, I would fully support having Columbia be a disambiguation page much like this. I continue to see this page's present title and status as the most useful and the most neutral. Like a good Supreme Court decision, the only people upset are those at the two extremes. -Acjelen 18:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC) OMG! Columbia already is a disambiguation page like this one. What sensible (and handsome) editors that page must have. -Acjelen 18:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Straw Poll 1

This Poll is not aimed to replace the debate above, but is being used to clarify a question.See Wikipedia's policy on polling for more information.

The question for this Poll is: What does the term America most commonly refer too? Please place your answer in the appropriate section by simply inserting the pound sign followed by four tildes. Black Harry 18:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] United States of America

1. Black Harry 18:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
2. Acjelen 19:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
3. Joie de Vivre 21:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
4. --Cheers, Komdori 21:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Americas

[edit] North America

[edit] South America

[edit] America the Band

[edit] America the Catholic Publication

[edit] America Online

[edit] This poll is pointless diversion from the real question

1. While there might be some who assert that the using term America to refer to something other than the U.S. is more common -- that is actually quite besides the point. The real question is whether the term is ambiguous. And that is, IMO, rather indisputable. It is indisputable that in native English usage, there are a variety of common referents for the term -- and two in particular that are at least very roughly in the same league of commonality. older ≠ wiser 21:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

   So in your opinion, any ambiguous term should go to a dab page directly? Just yesterday we wer commenting on Pele, which goes to the football player directly (as it should) since that is the most likely term. The top line in that article lets you get to the dab page. In the same was as America, Pele can potentially be ambiguous, but since it by far most commonly refers to the football player, it goes there directly and lets you click for the dab page if you didn't mean that. --Cheers, Komdori 21:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

   I might also on what you base your "roughly in the same league of commonality"? If you search for America "United States," even if you exclude the many common terms "North America," "South America," "Latin America," "Central America," here you still get 483 million results. I don't think it's useful to count "North America," etc. results for "alternate usages" because that's not the word America alone. Heck, you can even exclude "United States of America" from that search and get over 400 million results, all seemingly relevant to the US alone ("American factfinder" census information, lawn bowling in America, flags of America, National Parks "Experience America," and the like). The fact is that if you qualify America with an adjective you get a lot of results, but if you are talking about the word America alone, it almost universally is talking about the US. --Cheers, Komdori 21:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

   While there are other things that may be known as "Pele", to my knowledge no one has presented any convincing evidence that any other use even remotely comes close to that of the soccer star. That is the definition of a primary topic. In this case, while America meaning the U.S. is more common, it is not so overwhelming common and there is another usage which is also fairly common. There is little to be gained by having America become a redirect to the United Sates and significant potential for confusion. older ≠ wiser 01:40, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   It's true that the word "America" has multiple referents in English. However, it is not true that every concept that has multiple referents must be (or redirect to) a dab page on Wikipedia. The site is replete with counterexamples like School. --Tkynerd 03:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

2. I agree -- to launch a straw poll amidst discourse regarding this proposed move is potentially disruptive. Are not expressed opinions above sufficient? Corticopia 21:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

   Ummm. Actually I think older ≠ wiser's statement highlights exactly why we need this discussion. I don't think that anyone is arguing that the term America is not ambiguous. What is being asserted is that the U.S. is the well known primary meaning for America. If it is, then the Manual of Style gives us clear guidance on what to do. Thus this straw poll is entirely appropriate. Gruber76 21:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

   First, straw polls are evil. Second: now? No, this is a confused chicken-and-egg approach -- this poll doesn't help to clarify the question, it confuses it. Do one then another; doing both simultaneously on the same page is confusing and arguably disruptive. I can just as easily argue that the requestor of the move launched a straw poll (which really means nothing in the RM) since results to date do not favour the proposed move. So, how do you like them apples? Corticopia 21:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

   All voting is evil, including RM's' polls. He's trying to establish if we can agree there is a primary usage for the term, which is sorting out the mess of comments above. Primary usage is kind of critical for this naming issue, so it really does warrant a little section to the side, and the poll form does sort it out quite nicely. I really don't think there's any disruption here. Even if it's 90% oppose, it can still move if we wind up realising the oppose votes were based on a faulty foundation. I doubt it will happen, though, since I'm frankly shocked at the aggressive nature of some editors who are, as someone mentioned, most likely coming up with their reasons from familiarity with non-English languages. In the end, if there is that much fire in someone's heart to teach all the English speakers of the rather trivial fact that in some rather small parts of the English-speaking world it means something else (outside Britain, the US, Asia, and Australia, for example), I don't see that much harm in it (so leave it if it means that much to you), but at the same time, I also don't think it really corresponds to the primary usage policy (see the Google results I mentioned above). Just my two cents. --Cheers, Komdori 22:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

   Regarding the clear guidance that Gruber76 refers to, it is quite clear -- Where there is no such clearly dominant usage there is no primary topic page. -- That the RM poll above is running at present 2 to 1 opposed to the move should give some indication that there is not a primary topic in this case. older ≠ wiser 01:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Now you're talking! If it were clear that everyone, in their opposition, were using the same definition you were I would shut up and go away. But I don't see evidence of that, and that's precisely why I think the straw poll is serving a purpose. (the purpose of guiding the debate along the lines of which MoS guidelines apply.) What would you say is roughly the cut-off point for a usage to be "primary"? I'm not trying to trap you with slippery slopes or anything, here. It seems that there are two variables, and we've been framing the debate as though there is only one: 1) what is the % where a usage becomes "primary" 2) what is % usage in English of America to refer to the U.S.A. I think the answer to #1 is "about 2 to 1" (66%) and that we've clearly crossed that threshold in America being used to refer to the U.S.A. Gruber76 02:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Well, the guideline you cite and I quoted is pretty clear -- if there is significant disagreement about whether a term is a primary topic, chances are it is not. And 2 to 1 in the RM poll above opposed to having America redirect to US is pretty significant disagreement. older ≠ wiser 02:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   If the oppositions above stated they didn't think America was primarily used to refer to the U.S.A. then I would agree with you that there was not consensus. But I don't see evidence of that in their oppositions (even yours, before now.) Here's how I read it (and I'm happy to be corrected, or for people to clarify their objections.) Specifically:

   1. Older =/ wiser: you stated that there are people who disagree. Again, I don't think they're being guided by MoS.
   2. Corticopia: cites you, and that there are multiple definitions. Which we all agree with but isn't relevant to the discussion. -- Of course it's fully relevant -- the point of a DAB page is to "[resolve] conflicts in article titles ... when a single term can be associated with more than one topic." This definitely applies, either to America on its own or in concert with what are essentially modifiers (e.g., '(the major northern portion of) America', 'the United States of America', et al.) I can't specifically qualify other editorial opinions above about prevalence of usage regarding this or that, but the fact that there are more online hits for, say, North America than United States of America indicates in part that this DAB is appropriately placed. Corticopia 16:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
   3. Acjelen: doesn't cite a specific reason
   4. WilyD: cites the existence of multiple definitions. Again, we all agree with that point.
   5. Noel S McFerran: cites existence of word America prior to U.S.A. Relevance?
   6. Cuchullian: again, does not address whether usage of America to refer to U.S.A is primary or not.
   7. Thehalfone: agrees with Cuchillian
   8. AJD: seems to be addressing the issue at hand, though I disagree and would prefer to continue discussion.

   Gruber76 02:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Whether a person opposing the move agrees that the U.S. is the most common referent for America is irrelevant. The crucial question is whether the term is sufficiently ambiguous to be a disambiguation page or a redirect as a primary topic. older ≠ wiser 11:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   I thought that we had agreed that the test was "is X the primary meaning' for Y" or, alternately, "is X the clearly dominant usage for Y?" Because both the disambiguation page and the disambiguation link are used for ambiguous phrases, discussing sufficiency of ambiguousness is a distraction from the issue at hand. I had suggested that "is X the primary menaing for Y" comes in two parts:

   1. What % of usages is necessary for a phrase to become the primary meaning?
   2. What % of usages does America refer to U.S.A.?

   Discussing the large number of minority usages, the history of such usages, or the number of people who have expressed concern that there are minority usages is all tangential.

   I've stated clearly that I think the answer to #1 is 66%. I've also stated vaguely that I think #2 is well over 66%. I was trying to give people opposing this request the opportunity to change my mind by either proposing a stricter standard or illustrating that the most common usage of America doesn't pass that threshold.

   One last point, relevant to determining % of usage: according to the English language entry 84% of native English speakers are either in the U.S.A. or the U.K. so if America is used to refer to the U.S.A. 80% of the time in those two countries, but is universally used to refer to the Americas elsewhere then the primary meaning' test would still hold water.Gruber76 13:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Well, 66% to be a primary topic may be your clearly stated opinion, but is there any indication of such hard and fast metrics in policy or guidelines? Based on my experiences with disambiguation, I'd say the bar for primary topic is significantly higher. The clear guidance that you referred to above says, If there is extended discussion about which article truly is the primary topic, that may be a sign that there is in fact no primary topic, and that the disambiguation page should be located at the plain title with no "(disambiguation)". Given the protracted discussions on this topic, both now and previously, it seems pretty clear that this does not qualify for primary topic. older ≠ wiser 14:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   I chose 66% because it would mean the primary meaning was twice as common as all other meanings combined. But I was presenting it as an option and asking for discussion. You've now stated that you think it should be "significantly higher" but that doesn't give us much to go on. What's a good number? Why?

   And one more time: prior to your discussion with me there was no current "discussion about which article truly is the primary topic." There were a lot of unopposed declarations that America is an ambiguous phrase. Gruber76 14:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   (after ec)I oppose the illusion of certainty given by hard and fast metrics. It is a matter of discussion and consensus. Always has been. That is the nature of a wiki. My observation was that based on previous experience with disambiguation, 66% is rather low to claim a primary topic status. Re: your second point, look through the archives (both this page and Talk:Americas and somewhat even at Talk:United States. It has been discussed extensively many times. older ≠ wiser 15:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Actually, WP:NAME uses the term majority (see below). Majority only implies 51% is needed. So 66% is much more than needed. And this is the first open and formal debate on this issue, so any prior discussions have no relevance. Black Harry 15:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   WP:NAME majority is applicable in cases where there are two unambiguous names that refer to the same topic -- a simple majority can decide for one over the other. In ambiguous cases, deciding on primary topic status requires more than a simple majority. older ≠ wiser 15:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

3. Funny, I almost created a section like this b/c I knew people opposing the move would cry foul. However I do respect the fact that none of the opposers voted for the Americas, which does show that while they agree USA is what America most often refers too, that they are above voting for anything just to be confrontational Black Harry 01:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Well, what's the point of voting for something that is meaningless? I mean, there is relatively little dispute that for many people the term America commonly refers to the U.S. What is disputed is whether that usage is so overwhelmingly more common than any of the other uses to merit being treated as a primary topic. older ≠ wiser 02:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Well common usage is what this debate should be about. It shouldn't be a recitation of what other encyclopedias do per WP:NOT#PAPER. It should not be about whether or not the word "America" existed before the "US of America" existed. Nor should it be about whether non-native English Speakers would possibly find this offensive. It's about whether native speakers of English throughout the world use America to mean the US of A, or the contrary, that whenever the word America is used throughout the English-speaking world, chaos and confusion occur, requiring further definition of the term "America". Black Harry 02:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   No, common use helps in determining what the title of an article should be. The crucial question is whether the term America is ambiguous. older ≠ wiser 11:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Direct quote from the opening of WP:NAME:

   "Generally, article naming should prefer to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature. This is justified by the following principle:Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists."

   So, no the point of this debate should be whether or not confusion occurs throughout the English Speaking world whenever the word "America" is uttered. Given the fact that 84% of English Speakers in this world are from the US or the UK, its a safe bet to assume a majority (51%) would use America to mean the United States Black Harry 15:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   WP:NAME majority is applicable in cases where there are two unambiguous names that refer to the same topic -- a simple majority can decide for one over the other. In ambiguous cases, deciding on primary topic status requires more than a simple majority. older ≠ wiser 15:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   I'm not going to ask you to find me anything on WP:NAME that makes such a point. I am however, going to ask why you think 66% isn't enough. First, that would mean the most common usage is used twice as much as the second most used term. Second, if the United States Congress can override a Presidential veto with 66%, why is that still not enough for you? Black Harry 15:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Like I said previously, I oppose the illusion of certainty that hard and fast metrics provide. It is a matter for discussion and consensus not voting or the various ways that statistics can be manufactured to support just about any POV.

   (after ec) Further guidance at WP:NAME suggests "Conversely, a term that may be used to describe several different search terms may require a disambiguation page." and further down WP:NAME#Be precise when necessary recommends "Convention: Please, do not write or put an article on a page with an ambiguously named title as though that title had no other meanings." The crucial question is not whether the U.S. is the most common referent for America, but whether that term is sufficiently ambiguous for a disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 15:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   I'm starting to think that Bkonrad aka O≠W is no longer arguing his position out of good faith, but is doing so only too stop this debate from reaching a consensus. Every point we make, he argues is either wrong or irrelevant, then when we defend those points using strong, logical arguments, it becomes a mute issue because of POV? Black Harry 16:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Sorry, but your so-called "strong, logical arguments" are anything but that. If you are attempting to make points that are irrelevant to the question at hand or based on mistaken understandings of guidelines, why is it bad faith for me to point this out? older ≠ wiser 16:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Of course, perhaps I should just let this pass quietly, since as it stands now, the requested move is going nowhere with 8-4 opposed. older ≠ wiser 16:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Because in theory Wikipedia is not a democracy, meaning that the closing Admin will hopefully take time to read the whole debate here, and decide what to do based on the arguments brought up. Black Harry 16:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

   Yes indeed, and there is little doubt about what the outcome will be, assuming that the admin actually does read all the discussion here and understands current guidelines. The term America is ambiguous and should remain a disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 16:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

4. Per above. The poll has nothing to do with the question at hand, which is whether America overwhelmingly refers to the USA (which it doesn't). "North America" and "South America", while not necessarily the most used reference to America, are significant. Even America the band is a significant minority. Ral315 » 08:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

So you are honestly suggesting that there is a significant number of people who go around in the English speaking world using America to refer exclusively to South America?

1. See List of countries by English-speaking population - while America = the States may be the common usage in American, Canadian and a few other dialects, we know that simply polling the lot of us is unlikely to give insight into the plurality of usage, nevermind the majority of usage. WilyD 17:10, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Right, and considering the huge number of results where the word America means the US, do you have any evidence that it is often used as a word alone to refer to something else? I mean, even searching for "God Bless America" gives a million and a half results; "America the Beautiful" another million+, "America Online" the same. Even if it were just the US (it's not, it's also Canada, Europe, Asia, etc.), the number of times they use the word America to describe themselves far outweighs the times America is used (alone) to refer to anything else. --Cheers, Komdori 17:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Significant evidence to this effect has already been presented. WilyD 18:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, Wily. It is obvious the word "America" is to some extent ambiguous, the real question should be if it ambiguous enough to require a disambiguation page. Even though "United States" is the most common use, the term is still quite ambiguous, especially in terms of an encyclopedia search. A similar case is presented by Native Americans. The term is ambiguous; does it mean Indians, or just Indians in the US? Or does it refer to all indigenous peoples in the US, which includes Native Hawaiians and certain Alaska groups, who are not closely related to Indians? Or does it refer to all indigenous peoples in any state in the Americas, such as native Easter Islanders, who are Chilean? In this case there is a primary use of the term (Native Americans in the United States) but the term is still ambiguous enough to require a disambig page.--Cúchullain ^t/c 21:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry WilyD, I've read through everything and didn't see it, I must be blind. Can you give a link to the section or point where there is evidence that the word "America" alone is used (without being in a context of "Latin America," "Central America," etc.) to mean the Americas such that such usage rivals the usage of the word America alone (without being in the phrase "United States of America") to imply the US? The google searches seem to suggest there are hundreds of millions of cases of the latter, and comparitively I can't find more than a handful of the former. --Cheers, Komdori 21:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Google searches are probably a less accurate way of figuring this out than a coinflip would be. We already know India has the most english speakers and very poor internet access, for instance. The move America to United States crowd has exactly no evidence, whereas the "leave as a disambig" crowd has the precedent that every other encyclopaedia and every dictionary treats them equally (with a mix of first listing preference). WilyD 01:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

WilyD, the only hard evidence (for either side) on this whole page was your link to dictionary definitions in which every one listed had U.S.A. as the first listing. (Oh, one other, Komdori's citation from a paper encyclopedia (s)he had close at hand.) I would head to the library tomorrow and do a quick survey of encyclopedias if I thought it had any chance of swaying either side. Gruber76 01:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

That's willful blindness if there was any, since other dictionaries presented list senses for 'America' differentially, e.g., Merriam-Webster (listed 3rd), Oxford ... and Britannica, in its entry for America, redirects readers not to 'United States' but to 'Americas'. Corticopia 02:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Not willful blindness. Just sloppiness of where my cursor was when I started searching the page for "dictionary." If you're going to insult me, don't give me more credit than I deserve. Gruber76 02:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Credit where it is due? Corticopia 03:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

FWIW, the article on America at MSN Encarta is about the "second largest isolated landmass of the earth, comprising the two continents of the western hemisphere." older ≠ wiser 03:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

FWIW more, when you put in America in their search, it lists the United States article on the top and lists the article about the landmass further down, implying they assume you "really meant" US. As for paper encyclopedias, of course they have a dab page there, they don't have the ability to have both a redirect and a dab page like we do. --Cheers, Komdori 14:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.