Talk:Sines, Portugal

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.

Sines, Portugal → Sines — "Sines" is currently a redirect to Sine (disambiguation). Doesn't make sense if there's a town with this exact name. Reference to the Sine dab page can be added to the top of this article if moved. —Húsönd 01:37, 13 June 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.

• Oppose Articles on cities/towns should not have just the city/town name. Also, it is very easy to understand someone typing in "Sines" meant to type "Sine". Lrrr IV 02:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Not when those cities/towns are unequivocally the ones a user would be searching for, or when they are far more relevant than other towns with the same name (see London, Venice, Porto, Marbella, etc.). Then, if a user is searching for "Sines", it's illogical to redirect them to another word when something exists with the exact name they typed (happened to me, I was searching for the town and was redirected to something I was not searching for, thus this proposal). Finally, for those users who were in fact intending to reach an article about "Sine", an easy mention to that can be added to the top (For "Sine", see Sine (disambiguation)). Couldn't be more simple and logical.--Húsönd 02:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose - the place in Portugal really is not sufficiently well-known to override the normal "plural redirects to signular" policy. -- Beardo 03:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Is there such policy/guideline? How do you determine "sufficiently well-known"?--Húsönd 03:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(plurals)#Plural_forms; has the "man on the Clapham Omnibus" heard of it ? -- Beardo 20:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Please observe WP:CIVIL. The section you referred me to has no connection or relevance whatsoever to the situation we're dealing here. The name of the town "Sines" is not the plural of the word "Sine". You're mixing two completely different things, we're not talking about Pencils redirecting to Pencil.--Húsönd 22:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• I am sorry - in what way do you think I was not being civil ?

The plural redirects to the singular - that is the current position, and accords with policy. I never said that the town is the plural of anything. The redirect page that you want to change is the plural - we are talking about sines (plural) redirecting to sine. -- Beardo 23:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I understood the man on the Clapham Omnibus as scorn, thus the WP:CIVIL. :-/ You didn't say that the town is the plural of anything, but it seems as if you did because that's where the convention would apply. See Ev's comment below, I couldn't put it in better words. A mere plural should have no priority over a separate word. Again, see Hearts.--Húsönd 23:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

You asked "How do you determine "sufficiently well-known"?" - I answered one way that can be used. -- Beardo 17:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose: Far more people have heard of mathematical sines than of this small town in Portugal. Anthony Appleyard 05:49, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, and anyone typing "Sine" will find the lovely dab page. But directing there users who had typed "Sines" is just nonsensical. See Cars for instance, doesn't redirect to Car. Or even better, Hearts doesn't redirect to Heart, although I'm sure that more people have heard of the organ than they have of the card game. Common sense.--Húsönd 14:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. I haven't been able to find any exception in our naming conventions giving plurals of widely known subjects priority over the names of lesser-known ones that happen to share the exact same letters. I'm not aware of any precedent for this either. I agree with everything Húsönd has said so far. - Ev 04:43, 15 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.