Talk:Iberian Peninsula

Iberia taking its name from Caucaisian Iberia

I remember when I took a year-long history class in Spain, my teacher told me that the Phonecians (or some other group, possibly the Greeks) took the name "Iberia" from Caucasian Iberia and used it in Spain, much in a similar manner as New "York". However, I cannot find any documentation on this claim, anybody else heard about this?- ryandward —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryandward (talk • contribs) 05:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Location of Yucatan Peninsula

Where is the Yucatan Peninsula?

It is a peninsula in Mexico.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Mexico

It's the crescent at the bottom arching towards the G.O.Mexcio.

Languages

The visigoths spoke gothic by the 8th century, when the peninsula was invaded. When have they started to speak romance languages, like Spanish and Portuguese? I can't find this information, I'm not sure that's the right place to ask.

Southernmost peninsula in Europe?

Burgas00, I'm removing the sentence you added ("It is the southernmost of the three southern European peninsulas (i.e. Iberian, Italian and Balkan peninsulas)"). It is not very relevant or true! All of the aforementioned peninsulas run, more or less, between the 35th and 45th parallels north. The Ogre 14:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes i changed a couple of things. Firstly that Iberia is not the largest peninsula (the balkans are much larger) and secondly I added that it is the southernmost of the 3 European peninsulas which is true. The other peninsulas start much further north and none of them goes as far south as Iberia. Albeit, the difference is not very significant so if you want to erase it you can.

2nd biggest?

The article says it's the 2nd biggest peninsula in Europe, after the Balkan. What about Scandinavia? --Golbez 20:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

the 2nd biggest of the three southern european peninsulas

The article doesn't say southern, it says "It is the second biggest peninsula of Europe (after the Balkan peninsula) with an area of 582 860 km²." --Golbez 15:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Dude are you blind?

Are you? That sentence does not contain the word "southern". --Golbez 19:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

It is the western and southernmost of the three southern European peninsulas

(copy pasted from the article)

Do you have a strange condition which makes you blind to the word southern?

You seem to lack reading comprehension. I will caution you against being uncivil. The sentence does not say "the second biggest peninsula in southern Europe", it says "the second biggest peninsula in Europe," or at least it did, until I corrected it. --Golbez 21:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I would like to remind you to be obedient and follow all Wikipedia rules. Please respect one anothers privacy and rights //---// bigjcaudle

I have seen the article about the Balkans and there our fellows has concluded about what is Balkans and what extension should have: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkans , that mean that with 550.000 km2 Balkans peninsula is behind Iberian peninsula in extension, so i will change our article. (At least, while the Balkan's article remain with the same dates...) --Bentaguayre 10:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

French Cerdagne in the Iberian peninsula

The article about French Cerdagne that links to this one says that "It is the only French territory in the Iberian Peninsula." I think it's true because there is no geographical, but only political, division between French and Spanish Cerdagne. So I think this french area must be included in the political divisions.

Looking at the map I cant see any part of Iberia which is in France. The division between the two countries seems to correspond with the Pyrennes.--Burgas00 12:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Clarification on "Greek"?

Not sure what the author meant precisely when this was written in the first paragraph: "The same name of Iberia is used since Greek ages for another territory at the opposite corner of Europe: Caucasian Iberia." Could use a little clearer definition of what the "Greek ages" are in this context. As it stands now, the word "Greek" simply points to the non-helpful disambiguation page. I'll leave it that way until the specific period of history is clarified and hopefully someone else can take a poke at fixing the link. Fjbfour 15:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Did I help? The Ogre 15:23, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Etymology?

This section doesn't give the etymology of the word. What did Iberia mean in ancient Greek? My hunch is that it might be related to berber, but I've got nothing to back that up. Anyone? --Zachbe (talk) 18:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Nobody knows the etymology of Iberia. Your hunch that it is related to Berber is certainly the result of past theories that though the ancient Iberians had a North African origin. These theories are presently discredited. According to info on the Spanish wikipedia article it is believed that the root Iber is of Iberian origin, and could relate to the word ancient Iberians used to say river(which may have survided in the modern name or the Ebro river). I'll had this info to the article. Thanks. The Ogre (talk) 20:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

You can't add the info without the ref - I'll see if I can get a few.Dave (talk) 19:26, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Prehistoric Spain with Prehistoric Portugal & move to Prehistoric Iberia

Currently, the text of Prehistoric Spain seems really to be about prehistoric Iberia. Similarly, the text of Prehistoric Portugal seems really to be about the same thing. This would be perfectly understandable seeing as there was no Spain and no Portugal in prehistoric times. I have argued therefore that it would be best to have these articles merged under a title which indicates the geographical region rather than the modern states. I have proposed the articles be merged and moved to Prehistoric Iberia. Please come and discuss my proposal. Jimp 09:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Jim. If the merge goes through, what shall we do with Pre-Roman Portugal? You see, Prehistoric Spain encompasses a period that the "Portuguese" articles differentiated into Prehistoric Portugal and Pre-Roman Portugal. Should we merge them all? The Ogre 13:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I think a single Prehistoric Iberia makes a lot of sense - merge them all! Provocateur 03:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge from Hispania

Hello, "Hispania was the name given by the Romans to the whole of the Iberian Peninsula", "The term Hispania is Latin and the term Iberia is Greek". Apropos of the merger discussions above, I think the two articles Hispania and Iberian Peninsula would benefit from better integration, or possibly merging or refactoring. Hispania could become a disambiguation page pointing to Iberian Peninsula, History of the Iberian Peninsula during Roman times, etc., for example. For a related example, see Formosa -- the island of Taiwan used to be known as Formosa, but we don't have a separate article called "Formosa" about the same geographic location and the history during the time it was called Formosa. What do you think? —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-13 09:19Z

Hello Quarl. I tend to disagree with you, even if both articles could benefit from some better integration. But, for me, Iberian Peninsula is essencually an article about a geographical location, while Hispania is an article about the Iberian Peninsula in Roman and Visigothic times. I believe these two should not be merged and also because either Iberian Peninsula and Hispania are words people are used to search for with different connotations, they should not be confused. The Ogre 13:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I support Ogre's reasoning here. Provocateur 03:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

So do I. - Montréalais 14:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I also support this, good idea. Euskera 20:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I support Quarl because "Hispania was the name given by the Romans to the whole of the Iberian Peninsula" That is right if anyone studyed Italien or Swedish they should know that. bigjcaudle

My friend, I dont't see the relevance of knowing Italien or Swedish! The fact is that the Romans did call the Iberian Peninsula by the name Hispania. That is way the article Hispania should refer to the Roman (and Visigothic) Iberian Peninsula, and the article Iberian Peninsula should refer to the geographical peninsula in Europe that presently encompasses Portugal, Spain, Andorra and Gibraltar! The Ogre 23:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Also ancient Greeks and Romans called ancient Georgians by the name of Iberians, see Caucasian Iberia. In some Roman texts, they refer to the people in South Caucasus as Iberians. I know its confusing but thats the way it is. :) Euskera 15:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I also oppose a merger. The Iberian Peninsula is a geographical feature, while Hispania was a Roman and medieval political entity. I'm aware that this is an oversimplification; "Hispania" has often been used as a geographical term. Nevertheless, there are two different concepts here which should be distinguished. FilipeS 14:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Iberia has been inhabited since...

I have removed a sentence regarding how long Iberia has been inhabited. It was essentially contentious, inaccurate and unconfirmed. Back in February the figure was 500,000; in May it was 1,000,000; in June 700,000 now 1,000,000 - well which is it? Chris Buttigieg^talk 19:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello Chris Buttigieg. Acording to Prehistoric Iberia, "Hominin inhabitation of the Iberian Peninsula dates from the Paleolithic. Early hominin remains have been discovered at a number of sites on the peninsula. Significant evidence of an extended occupation of Iberia by Neandertal man has also been discovered. Homo sapiens first entered Iberia towards the end of the Paleolithic. For a time Neanderthals and modern humans coexisted until the former were finally driven to extinction. Modern man continued to inhabit the peninsula through the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods." It continues, "Iberia has a wealth of prehistoric sites. Many of the best preserved prehistoric remains are in the Atapuerca region, rich with limestone caves that have preserved a million years of human evolution. Among these sites is the cave of Gran Dolina, where six hominin skeletons, dated between 780,000 and 1 million years ago, were found in 1994. Experts have debated whether these skeletons belong to the species Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, or a new species called Homo antecessor." So... I believe the figure 1,000,000 is correct. I am reverting you. Hope you are ok with it. The Ogre 20:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Chris Buttigieg^talk 20:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! See you around. The Ogre 01:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Iberia?

I'm spanish and I never ear about the Iberia to called the Iberian peninsula. The iberians only occupied the self North-east of Spain. The other civilization was the celts. The more correct is Celtiberia or Hispanic Peninsula but the word Iberian peninsula is very use but no Iberia. Iberia is a Enterprise of Airlines in Spain. Look the Península ibérica in spanish version please. Thanks for the attention. --Thor8 (talk) 13:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thor, the greeks knew the Peninsula as Iberia, and equally the anglosaxon world call to our Peninsula, Iberia; don't matter how we know really our land, at the moment that different peoples have differents names for the same land, for example we know Greece as Grecia, but the greeks say Hellas, the same can be said here althought you didn't know before this anglosaxon custom, the greeks can't come here to say us that we use an uncorrect name, equally here this is the english wiki. regards --Bentaguayre (talk) 17:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Understands what you say but is not the same. Hispania was ever the peninsula but when Hispania (Spain) begins a political territory in 1492 with Catholic Kings. The peninsula begin called Iberian because don't confuse the Portuguese with the Castilians. But all peninsula is Hispania, Iberia is the greek name of the oriental Spain the name Hispania is more old. I-shphanim is the phoenician name and become in Hispania for romans. The reasons are politics, if you talk spanish read the Península Ibérica in the article in Spanish. More specifically Toponimia. Best regards. --Thor8 (talk) 18:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

"Iberia" at the Merriam-Webster Online. This is the English Wikipedia, not the Spanish Wikipedia. FilipeS (talk) 21:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Olá Thor. I understand that you are well intentioned, but, besides these being the English language wikipedia, besides the fact that another wikipedia article is not a source according to policy, besides the fact that Iberia, in English and in modern Spanish means without a doubt the whole of the Peninsula (an not just the eastern parts anciently inhabited by the Iberians), the fact is that Hispanic in the modern sense means Spain and not the whole of the peninsula. The word "Hispanic" in modern English (and its counterparts in other languages) means something pertaining to the country of Spain or its cultural descendants (as in Hispanic America, which does not include Brazil), not all of the Iberian peninsula (as the respective articles show). The fact is that Castillian expansionism over the centuries (ask not only the Portuguese, but also the Galicians, the Basques or the Catalans...) tried to monopolize the definition of Iberia in a way that satisfied its imperial interests. In fact, even if Hispania was used in ancient times to refer to the whole of Iberia, today it is not, only when refering to Roman Hispania, not the present times. Furthermore, if you call Hispanic to the Iberian peninsula, this not only is simply not true, but is felt as profoundly offensive at least by the Portuguese. For all these reasons and more, this article should not emply that Hispanic is Iberia. If the Spanish wikipedia states that, without stating that it is a Spanish centered POV, that it is wrong and against policies and should be corrected. Gracias! The Ogre (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thor, the spanish wiki article is highly inacurate and i will correct it tomorrow, better is the article Iberia about the same question. The peninsula wasn't called iberian because portuguese or spanish, the greeks of ancient time called it with the name first to the eastern part and then to the hole Peninsula, in fact is a second name originated from a diferent source than Hispania wich like you said is phoenician. The question here is that both names are correct for the Peninsula, Hispania became more popular but the form of Iberia is used by the anglosaxon world today and since many years, so i repeat is irrelevant how we know our land and if the more popular along the history is another name, this is the English wikipedia and they say to our Peninsula, Iberia. They have the right to name the things like they want according with their tradition, and if you not support this think about the example that i put before: we the spanish call Greece to the land of the greeks, but the original name is Hellas and is inhabited by hellenos according to theyrself, do you want to change the spanish form of call to the country because this? --Bentaguayre (talk) 23:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thor

In fact user Thor seems to have a POV agenda, since the POV ramblings in the Spanish wikipedia are also his doing as Thor8. This must be carefully watched as this editor seems to push a Spanish (Castilian) centered agenda, trying to minimize the diversity of Iberia and reduced to Spain as seen from Madrid. Beware! The Ogre (talk) 02:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I tried to revert his edits in the Spanish wikipedia and was treated like a vandal, even if I always explained my reasons. Well... Their prblem if they want to have a crapy, Spanish chauvinistic article! Maybe the Portuguese wikipedia should state that Iberia is the Lusitanian Peninsula!! Wouldn't that be great? The Ogre (talk) 02:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Lusitania, Bética and Tarraconensis was division of the Hispania. All the peninsula is Celtiberian not iberian only. And Portugal was there few Iberians isn´t it? I only say what Peninsula Hispanic is more correct, but is accept the name Iberian Peninsula. Usually is confused Castille with Spain but the old Spain is old peninsula with Aragón, Navarra, León, Castilla y Portugal. Aragon was castellanized but his spirit is live in Cataluña, they speak in Catalá but is Spain, not Castille but this is Spain. My english is not very well. If you speak spanish contact with me in the Castilian Wikipedia. Regards. --Thor8 (talk) 11:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The Spanish article at least has references. O Descobrimento da América e o Tratado de Tordesilhas, de Manuel Fernandes Costa, Biblioteca Breve, Instituto de Cultura Portuguesa, Secretaria de Estado da Cultura, Ministério da Cultura e da Ciência, 1ª ed., Lisboa, 1979.

This was write by Portuguez in article Península Hispánica and I fusioned with Península Ibérica and I do it with this reference. Read the book before change the spanish article. --Thor8 (talk) 11:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Your reasoning is incorrect as you are trying to justify, improperly, for historical reasons, that the Peninsula shuold be called Hispanic Peninsula. However, wven if some ancient peoples did called it like this or even differently, what does it matter? Nowadays the people that inhabit it, as well as the rest of the world calls it something else (Iberian Peninsula). This is not the only instance where something of the sort happened. Using your own reasoning, if we were to follow what ancient peoples called the Iberian Peninsula, maybe we should revert back to Arabic times and start calling it Al-Andaluz or Andaluzia. See the fallacy in your reasoning? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.136.74.101 (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Quick Question in Regards to Hispania

I was just wondering what the difference is between the Iberian Peninsula and Hispania? I had thought that they always referred to the same thing (except Hispania in regards to the Spanish/Portugese Speaking World.) Of course, I haven't read the whole of either article, but I really don't see the difference. I am no expert on the subject, but could these be merged? I mean, the first sentence in Hispania is "Hispania was the name given by the Romans to the whole of the Iberian Peninsula," and the Iberian Peninsula is what this whole article is about. I understand that these terms could be somewhat loose, but are they that different? Mhavril39 (talk) 03:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you should read both articles before asking, no? FilipeS (talk) 09:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

The Iberian Peninsula is a geographical reality. Hispania is an historical reality, pertaining to the period of Roman Iberia (even if the name was also somewhat used for some centuries after that). The Ogre (talk) 10:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

It's a bit more complicated than that. Hispania was an overall Roman name for the Peninsula, although could be used to indicate a part (Hispania Tarraconensis, for example). Come the medieval times, there were two of them -- a Christian Hispania and a Muslim Hispania -- and so Fernando I (d. 1060) was referred to as 'rex Hispaniarum' (King of the Hispaniae). When Ferdinand and Isabella abrogated the name they did so primarily in the vernacular: España (in the singular), although both España and Las Españas had been used from the 13th century to denote the (Christian) part of the Peninsula, and at times all of it. To complain that plucky little Portugal was not included by this new use overlooks the fact that they fully expected Portugal to be joined to their union of crowns (as it eventually was under the Habsburgs, and as it nearly was under Manuel I of Portugal around 1500). So: ([All] The) Spain(s) is perfectly acceptable as a means of referring to the Peninsula for the medieval period. Spain (= España = union of the crowns of Castile and Aragon) takes off at the end of the fifteenth century and becomes normal usage. But since Hispanic now means, in English, basically 'Latin American', it can't be used without confusion. So Iberian Peninsula is best. And, to quibble more than anyone else, Lusitania is all very well for Portugal, but where was the capital of the Roman province? Augusta Emerita, i.e. Mêrida, currently in... Spain. Terminology is ever imperfect from the historical point of view. Hostiensis (talk) 21:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Etymology accuracy

What is the source for the etymology presented here? My wife's "Special Topics in Spanish Linguistics: Spanish Dialects" class has presented a different etymology (I will have to get the name of her book later) which suggests that it means nothing like, "Land of the rivers." RobertM525 (talk) 23:21, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello Robert. I'm pushing the article along. These etymologies that you read are based on certain assumptions about the affinities of the Iberians. If you assume they are Celtic then you can come up with a really great Celtic etymology. If you assume they are Basque, then it gets even better. Perhaps you might assume they are Phoenician. There is one for that too. None of them quite fit, exactly. The evidence states its native name was Iber and Iberia was named for the river. Unfortunately no one has much of an idea about the language. So, the professional linguists brush off these speculative etymologies and do not repeat them. We have to wait until a bilingual text of some length is found. It may not be long, or it may not be for 100 years. For general advice I would say, stick with the professional linguists. Put aside the expectation that someone has an answer for every question. Most ancient names remain unknown, and that makes sense. How should we know them when the languages are not known? So, it is nice to get the students thinking about things. However most of what we think is pure mythology. I went through a phase of etymologizing names too. I blush to think of it. They can present all they like, presentations do not make things true, and we have the epistemological problem of knowing when something is true. Unfortunately a name in an unknown language cannot be verified. Best wishes,Dave (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

rqmap

A topographic map would be nice. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 14:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

French Cerdagne

Why is this area part of the Iberian Peninsula? Is there some sort of geological feature that this region has in common with Iberia and not with the rest of France? We should explain its inclusion. Funnyhat (talk) 03:35, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The french Cedagne was a spanish region occupied by France after the treaty of Pyrinees. They used to speak catalan in that region. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.35.112.8 (talk) 22:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Map of the Reconquista

The limits of the Kingdom of Navarre are invented. The region of Biscay belong to the Crown of Castille

Algarve is not a city

Algarve is the name of a region not a city. The administrative centre is the city of Faro and that might be one of the biggest in Iberian Peninsula. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.155.157.111 (talk) 14:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Peninsule itself

This article, as almost all about Spain is a mess. First of all, it is true that the Iberian Peninsula more or less is limited by the Spanish-French border, but this is absurd since internationally a peninsule ends in the narrower region of land which linked it to the continent -in that case, well inside France. Since this is not so considered, I think it is compulsory to quote some kind of geographical authority stating clearly the limits of the peninsule. Secondly, it is all on the contrary: Hispania was first a political (not geographical) device, under Roman rule, and after, a geographical concept in despite of political ambitions (the same as America or Europe is today, but very far from a political subject, since they are made of multiple political units). No unity was achieved even when the whole peninsula was ruled under Habsburgs, since each kingdom held its own politics. Last, a peninsula is a mere fact of geography, not more. I don't understand why a peninsula has history, history is a subject of people, not floors. 213.60.26.62 (talk) 03:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup

Added cleanup tag. Much of the article seemed like it could use some cleanup, the voice didn't sound right. Hope that's cool. Saffolicious (talk) 07:28, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Move request

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: Move Iberia to Iberia (disambiguation); do not move Iberian Peninsula to Iberia. Ucucha 22:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

---

• Iberia → Iberia (disambiguation)
• Iberian Peninsula → Iberia
• The region of Spain and Portugal is by far the primary contemporary usage. This usage is far more notable than any historical name for some area in the Caucases/north-eastern Turkey. Users who search for "Iberia" are overwhelmingly more likely to be looking for the region of Europe which includes Spain and Portugal. - Relisting  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Helvetica (talk) 18:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

• Ok on the 1st, no on the 2nd. Iberia should be a redirect to Iberian Peninsula, but this article should remain so. The Ogre (talk) 22:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
• I fully agree with The Ogre. --Labattblueboy (talk) 03:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Ogre's idea sounds alright to me. Helvetica (talk) 16:29, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose Arguably, the primary useage is the airline, rather than the peninsula. Better to retain Iberia as the disambiguation page. Skinsmoke (talk) 11:24, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
• Support exactly as nominated. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 17:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
• Partial Support Support Iberia → Iberia (disambiguation), but not Iberian Peninsula → Iberia. It'd probably be worth having a separate RM on Iberian Peninsula after this closes, as long as that presented some solid evidence showing that page is what most people looking for Iberia are seeking here.
  — V = I * R (talk to Ohms law) 03:47, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
• Comment - re:Skinsmoke: the airline clearly isn't the primary topic; it was viewed some 4,000 times this month so far (along with the old location, which gives another 9,500), while the peninsula has been viewed nearly 30,000 times this month. There doesn't seem to be that significant a difference in page views (less than 2 to 1 - if it was by an order of magnitude or more then we'd have a case for primacy) to warrant a page move. In short, the dab page should probably be kept where it is, at least according to the page view stats. Parsecboy (talk) 15:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
  • That argument appears to be flawed in that it does not consider that there are two dab pages and the Iberian Peninsula is probably on the wrong page, it should be listed on the Iberian dab page. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
    • I don't see how it's flawed; I was merely refuting the assertion that the airline is the primary topic for Iberia. Regardless of where they're coming from, only twice as many people are viewing this article as those who are looking at the airline article. That does not qualify for a primary topic in my book. Parsecboy (talk) 03:10, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
      • It helps to compare apples to apples. Iberian Peninsula belongs on the Iberian dab page and not on the Iberia dab page. So comparing results for two different base names is simply invalid. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
        • I think you're forgetting that the Iberian peninsula can also be called Iberia. We shouldn't take the mindset that dab pages are only for articles that have that specific title followed by a disambiguator (i.e., Iberian peninsula not being warranted on this page because it isn't Iberia (peninsula)). If someone would rationally search for the article with that term, then it belongs on the dab page. Parsecboy (talk) 13:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. And remove Iberian Peninsula from the Iberia dab page and list it on the Iberian dab page. Or else combine the two dab pages, which might not be the best choice. Finally I believe that if we move the dab page out of the primary name space, it will make it harder for the dab folks. There needs to be a strong case for moving a dab page and that it not demonstrated here. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
• Support the first, don't care about the second. (I like Iberia better but I know many readers need their hand held when crossing a busy street.) — AjaxSmack 08:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Can someone explain what purpose is served by moving Iberia → Iberia (disambiguation)? Vegaswikian (talk) 21:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
    • I think the idea is to either move this article to Iberia or at least redirect Iberia here. Parsecboy (talk) 23:22, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
• Many people likely most often come across the name 'Iberia' as the airline when they need to fly; usage to mean "Spain and Portugal" is old history which likely they have not needed to know since they left school. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
• Usage stats for all 2009:- Airline 233936 page views; Pensinsula 470667 page views, therefore no real primacy, I'll relist for another week to see if a better consensus can be reached.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
  • And note that we are comparing IBERIA to IBERIAN two different words. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Discussion 2

I text-merged this discussion in from Talk:Iberia. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

• Iberia → Iberia (disambiguation)
• Iberian Peninsula → Iberia
• The region of Spain and Portugal is by far the primary contemporary usage. This usage is far more notable than any historical name for some area in the Caucases/north-eastern Turkey. Users who search for "Iberia" are overwhelmingly more likely to be looking for the region of Europe which includes Spain and Portugal. Helvetica (talk) 18:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
• Ok on the 1st, no on the 2nd. This should be a redirect to Iberian Peninsula, but that article should remain so. The Ogre (talk) 22:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
• That seems a reasonable compromise. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Ogre's idea sounds alright to me. Helvetica (talk) 16:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

• Support the first, don't care about the second. (I like Iberia better but I know many readers need their hand held when crossing a busy street.) — AjaxSmack 01:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
• Support exactly as nominated. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 17:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
• Partial Support Support Iberia → Iberia (disambiguation), but not Iberian Peninsula → Iberia. It'd probably be worth having a separate RM on Iberian Peninsula after this closes, as long as that presented some solid evidence showing that page is what most people looking for Iberia are seeking here.
  — V = I * R (talk to Ohms law) 03:47, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Iberian Peninsula which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 14:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)