Talk:Müggelsee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Lakes
 Müggelsee is part of WikiProject Lakes, a WikiProject which aims to systematically improve lake-related articles using the tools on the Project page. You are welcome and encouraged to edit the article attached to this page and to join the project.
WikiProject Lakes
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Germany Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] requested move

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.

The result of the proposal was restore the title "Müggelsee", per the discussion below. I understand the objection to the lack of certainty here, but that is no reason to default to the new title, which is not supported by consensus. Feel free to nominate for deletion whichever articles you wish. Dekimasuよ! 00:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Müggelsee is the common english name. google scholar hits:

"Müggelsee water": 537 [1]
"lake-Müggel water": 9 [2], one of which is for "Lake Müggel- see". Yaan (talk) 19:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
P.S. "Müggel-lake water": 3 [3] Yaan (talk) 16:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

support: common English name. Yaan (talk) 12:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

  • I agree that "Lake Müggel" rarely seems to be used in English, and that the article should be moved to the prior title. Olessi (talk) 03:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
  • The relevant question, however, is whether it is "Müggel" or "Müggelsee" in English. The "Lake" is a conventional identifier, just as most "River" articles as well.
Another important question, in any case, no matter where the article's name ends up, is why this is hidden away with Müggel and Muggel and Muggelsee and Lake Muggel all redlinks. Gene Nygaard (talk) 15:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Strongly oppose. Any such request is premature, as long as the article remains unreferenced. Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
better now? Sorry for all the references being in german, OTOH at least igb and the förderverein seem pretty authorative. Yaan (talk) 16:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Better for purposes of the "unreferenced" tag. But nothing particularly relevant to the requested move. Let's have something about who uses Müggelsee in English, who uses Muggelsee or Mueggelsee,, who uses "Lake Müggel" or "Müggel Lake" or "Lake Muggel" or "Muggel Lake" or "Lake Mueggel" or "Mueggel Lake", who uses "Müggel" alone in English and whether or not the "Lake" part of the articles name is merely a conventional usage for this class of article. We also see "Lake Müggelsee" in English. Is there reason enough in English usage to claim that a move is reasoable? Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Support: "Lake Müggel" seems to exist mainly in Wikipedia. -- User:Docu

[edit] Additional comments

Any comparison of usage needs to consider "Müggel Lake" as well as "Lake Müggel". They should be considered equivalents in any comparison of usage between "Müggelsee" and "Müggel". The choice of what comes first is simply a matter of only one slot being available for the article's name, and Id guess that the choice was made in part based on the way similar articles are named. Gene Nygaard (talk) 15:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


If nobody cares about all those redlinks above, if it isn't important enough for anyone to worry about whether or not our readers can find it, I'd say the appropriate solution is probably not a move of the article, but rather just send it to WP:AfD. Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:23, 2 March 2008 (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.