This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is part of WikiProject Norway, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Norway. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
I intend to move the article back to it's original name, instead of the official name, as per the Wikipedia official policy on naming conventions. The move to the official name was not discussed here first, and here is my rationale for moving it back:
WP:NAME states that an article should have the name that is most common in use
The municipality is in Norway, therefore its Norwegian name is obviously the most common name in everyday use
In official signage kommune, gielda/suohkan etc is included
The Norwegian and Sami language wikis have their articles named in those languages respectively, not both
As the municipality has a significant amount of Sami speakers, I can understand it if someone feels the article should be moved to the Sami name. However, for the reasons above, I think the correct place is under its Norwegian name. - BsL 00:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Oppose per argument in Talk:Porsanger. I suggest the discussion continues there.Labongo 08:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
It should be under the name by which it is best known in English: Karasjok. Gene Nygaard (talk) 08:20, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
But the worst part of the deal is that the POV-pushers who insist on different names don't have enough sense not to hide it away so it cannot be found in categories. Gene Nygaard (talk) 08:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Norwegian Meteorological Institute has recently released data for average daily high and low temperature for Karasjok, based on the official recordings. As seen in the chart, the climate table recently added to this article is fairly correct, but not entirely. We should use the offical recordings, for instance a slightly warmer high and low in July, and slighlty colder low in January than in the table used in article now. Should we use this climate chart format, or a table?
The table used in article currently also has incorrect precipitation information. Mean annual precipitation in Karasjok is 366 mm as seen here. So I intend to replace current table with the climate chart used here.Orcaborealis (talk) 14:02, 23 October 2011 (UTC)