Talk:Cape Poge Light
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate 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.
The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 08:11, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Page move
Move is being requested due to the fact the USCG and USFS refer to this light as a Light not Lighthouse as they do all active US lightstations. [1]Gateman1997 20:07, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not so sure...the website of the Trustees of Reservations (the foundation that maintains the lighthouse) shows that it is called Cape Poge Lighthouse. See for yourself:
- That should be ample evidence to keep it as it it! → J@red talk+ ubx 21:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- In this instance however the foundation that works to make the light pretty is secondary to the entity that owns and operates it which is the US Government through the auspices of the US Coast Guard (and previously the US Lighthouse service). The Coast Guard and official governament name is Cape Poge Light. Also common name would apply here and Cape Poge Light produces 1750 Google hits while Cape Poge Lighthouse only produces 818.Gateman1997 23:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I guess I see your point. If you can find a few other reputible sources that call it the Cape Poge Light, then you can change it. I just think that the trustees of reservation is just as reputible, though. → J@red talk+ ubx 23:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'll look around, however I don't think any sources are more reputable then two departments of the US gov't. (As long as it's not homeland security ;) )Gateman1997 02:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I guess I see your point. If you can find a few other reputible sources that call it the Cape Poge Light, then you can change it. I just think that the trustees of reservation is just as reputible, though. → J@red talk+ ubx 23:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- In this instance however the foundation that works to make the light pretty is secondary to the entity that owns and operates it which is the US Government through the auspices of the US Coast Guard (and previously the US Lighthouse service). The Coast Guard and official governament name is Cape Poge Light. Also common name would apply here and Cape Poge Light produces 1750 Google hits while Cape Poge Lighthouse only produces 818.Gateman1997 23:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- I dunno. Google "Cape Poge Lighthouse" -Wikipedia shows 876 while "Cape Poge Light" -Wikipedia shows 274. Not exactly conclusive evidence either way, but tending towards supporting "Lighthouse" as the more common usage. older ≠ wiser 15:08, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- Must be because I used Yahoo instead of Google. Either way however the official name is Cape Poge Light, that is indisputable. Shouldn't the article reside at the official name?Gateman1997 20:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- In this case it makes little difference to me, so long as there are redirects in place. Speaking stricly for myself, I'd always refer to such structures as lighthouses, and most of the ones in Michigan are generally described that way. I'm not familiar with this one or typical usage in MA. I guess it depends a little on perspective, most tourists and shutterbugs are more interested in the structure housing the light and would likely refer to it as a lighthouse. From a nautical perspective (the USCG), it's the light itself that is more important. older ≠ wiser 21:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- Must be because I used Yahoo instead of Google. Either way however the official name is Cape Poge Light, that is indisputable. Shouldn't the article reside at the official name?Gateman1997 20:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- All right, Gateman, I'll give this one to you, because it doesn't really matter to me that much anyway. But I visit the Vineyard often, so if I ever get a chance to go to the Lighthouse and there's an inscription or plaque somewhere showing the real name, I'll make sure to tell you and change it accordingly. For now, it seems reasonible to move it. → J@red talk+ ubx 21:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.