From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Writing systems (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Votes for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 25 August, 2005. The result of the vote was keep. An archived record of this vote can be found here.


The following discussion is an archived debate 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.

The result of the debate was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) 09:13, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Request move[edit]

Request move because most other alphabets use the alphabet itself as the name of the article. G-caron can be considered as a variant of G, --Hello World! 14:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
  • I strongly oppose moving the page from G-caron to Ǧ. CDThieme 00:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose—titles are the names of things, not the things. Michael Z. 2006-01-23 15:10 Z
  • Dubious Oppose The suggested name doesn't even display on my monitor; how am I going to watch this? Septentrionalis 01:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose: agree with MZ, especially when the character is not displayable on many systems. Jonathunder 11:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


The assertion in the proposed move is false; only the twenty-six letters of the Latin Alphabet for English are named using the familiar letters. For other characters there is no consistent usage, but most of them use a title which is written out. We shouldn't have articles at "Ǧ", "Þ", "Ж", "Ѩ", "", or ""—how on Earth would an average reader know that their titles are "G-caron", "Thorn", "Zhe", "Little Yus iotified", "Han", and "Hryvnia"? Simply put, titles should be readable. Michael Z. 2006-01-23 15:25 Z

I just saw this page in Windows Explorer. It's even worse than expected—only two of my one-character links even display (Safari/Mac displays all but the last, which is part of Unicode 4.1). Michael Z. 2006-01-24 03:27 Z

I can see the revised target; which is an improvement. But:

  • Can everybody?
  • Is it practical to use a template in a page name?
  • Can editors link to this?
    • it's still a little square in my edit screen.
  • And why not WP:Use English?

Dubiously, Septentrionalis 04:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Your dubiousness is warranted. Netoholic made it display on some Windows systems by putting it into template:Unicode on the page above, but:
  • This won't work in many contexts, most importantly the actual title of an article at the top of the page; also the title bar of a browser window
  • This still doesn't work on my vanilla Windows XP system, probably due to lack of support in the default fonts installed
  • It now displays with visible doubled square brackets [[Ǧ]], because template:Unicode breaks the move template above
Nice try, Neto. Michael Z. 2006-01-24 05:08 Z

The title !Xóõ language is obviously unreadble by most people using English only. Would some of you consider move it? Furthermore, if you oppose the move of G-caron to Ǧ, please consider move the following articles to an “English-readable title”. (Ć, Ĉ, Ĝ, Ĥ, Ĵ, Ŝ, Ã, Ñ, Õ, Ā, Ă, Ğ, Ŭ, Ä, Ö, Å, Č, Ǩ, Ž, Ǯ, Ș, Ş) --Hello World! 15:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Also ß, Ø, Ɔ, Ɛ, , Ƒ --Hello World! 09:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

For starters, four of those letters don't display on a default Windows XP system. Their pages would have a blank box for the title at the top. Not acceptable.
 !Xóõ is a readable name to English readers, "Xoo", even if they don't know how to pronounce it. What would they call Ǯ? This letter's name is ezh, with a caron, and it is not part of the English Latin alphabet—in English the word ezh is not spelled "ʒ", it is spelled "ezh". The name of the letter ñ is "enye". The English name of the letter a is "A", but "Č" is not English nor a name at all. May as well call an article "한".
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) says that articles should be titled using English names. Why on Earth do you want these articles to be titled by single non-English letters? Michael Z. 2006-01-24 18:44 Z
Should we move ñ to enye? I acknowlegde that there should be an agreement of the title of such articles, and modify WP:UE and wipe off the “Disputed issues” section.--Hello World! 03:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I think Ñ should probably be moved to its Spanish (native) name "Enye", or possibly the descriptive title "N with tilde". Those disputed issues should be cleaned up, but I think most of these letter articles are a different issue. For example, the difference between Vuk Stefanović Karadžić and Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic is not that major—some readers may find the diacritics puzzling, but they can read either name, even if they can't pronounce it. On the other hand, Ezh is a name, but ʒ simply is not. The more familiar letters with diacritics are less confusing, but I feel they should be titled according to the same principle. Michael Z. 2006-01-25 05:52 Z
In any case, so what? That should be discussed in Talk:Ñ. Wikipedia is inconsistent; and a good thing too. Septentrionalis 05:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.