User talk:BeerBuildsBetterBodies

Welcome!

Hello, BeerBuildsBetterBodies, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Bejnar (talk) 02:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Geographic names

In the English Wikipedia, we use the common English language name for places. It does not matter what the local name is, nor the official, if there is a well ingrained English language name for the place. See the guidelines at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names). In such cases, official names are mentioned in the appropriate articles, not as article titles. --Bejnar (talk) 02:52, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cabo Verde is now used throughout all official instances (UN, US, ...): please refer to CIA World Factbook and BGN (NGA).

Therefore this name should be reflected in all articles concerning this country similar to entries about Cote D'Ivoire! --BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 05:31, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline says: When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it. The Ivory Coast article is at Ivory Coast for that very reason. Lets keep the conversation here in one place. --Bejnar (talk) 06:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The UN are undoubtedly the leading authority when it comes to global matters. They have a geographical names data base with thousands of names in their 6 languages. Wiki should give direct actual and factual data if it wants to remain a trustworthy and valued source of information. The UNGEGN clearly lists names as Cabo Verde, Cote D'Ivoire, Myanmar and Timor-Leste (just to name a few) as the English versions of those country names, so they perfectly fit into the English Wiki. This also means these names have become the standard and Cape Verde, Ivory Coast, Burma and East Timor should be redirected to these official names and not vice versa. The world is changing fast; Wiki should not wait and lag behind until the inert masses have finally adopted these changes. --BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 11:35, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We are not the UN, we are not the United States government. This is the Wikipedia with its own set of guidelines derived over many years of discussion. The arguments that you make are not new. Maybe if you read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) it will help you better understand Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names). --Bejnar (talk) 16:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did read it and what I noticed is that there is no firm basis to start from, which leads to many discussions that could be avoided if there was. Wiki can use its own guidelines there where the experts (the UN working group) haven't reached any agreements yet. Ignoring the huge amount of work that they have already done and the worldwide consensus that they have already reached, and valuing Wiki's naming conventions above theirs is unrealistic. --BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 17:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The agreements of UN officials is neither world-wide consensus nor English speakers consensus, it is UN officials' consensus. You'd be better off looking at the The Permanent Committee on Geographical Names for British Official Use. --Bejnar (talk) 10:13, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, they haven't done any update for almost a year, thus unreliable. Secondly, they themselves refer to the UN and BGN when it comes to worldwide usage. Finally, and most importantly, one should not use an individual country's naming system to avoid any bias or local preferences. The UNGEGN consists of several linguistic/geographical divisions from all over the world. An individual country can decide for itself to which division it wishes to belong. All entities concerned arrive at decisions by consensus. So, your claims do not hold water. To get better informed, you may want to do some reading at UN Group of Experts on Geographical Names. --BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 12:31, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]