Talk:Turmbergbahn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-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.)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject.

[edit] Possible rename to Turmberg Funicular

This article was renamed by User:Rex Germanus from Turmbergbahn to Turmberg Funicular with the comment English Wikipedia.

I have reverted this move, on the grounds that Turmbergbahn is a proper name. If there was clear evidence that there was a commonly accepted English variant of the name, then it would be perfectly correct to use that in the English Wikipedia rather than the German variant. An example of this would be to use Rhine rather than Rhein, as Rhine is the common English name for that river. However a search using Google (on English language pages only) shows no hits for the exact name Turmberg Funicular; although there is one hit on Turmbergbahn Funicular. There are 140 hits on Turmbergbahn. So I think it is clear that Turmberg Funicular is not in common English usage.

So the question then is, should we invent new names for things that look more English, just because this is the English Wikipedia. I'd say not. -- Chris j wood 20:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I also note that the rename was made without any attempt to adjust the article in line with the new name. I'm cool if you still feel that the article should be renamed, but please do the whole job. -- Chris j wood 20:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)