Talk:Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 25 July 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved  — Amakuru (talk) 19:59, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Elmwood Cemetery, New Brunswick, New Jersey → Elmwood Cemetery (New Brunswick, New Jersey) – harmonize Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, and seems like a page that can be moved without an RM. Randy Kryn 23:38, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elmwood Cemetery (New Brunswick, New Jersey). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:14, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 June 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey). There is consensus to move the cemetery's page off the (North Brunswick) title. Of the two main targets, (North Brunswick, New Jersey) and (New Jersey), the latter seems to be the better one on "only as precise as necessary" and concision grounds. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:48, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick) → Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick, New Jersey) – For consistency with the article name of the dab, North Brunswick, New Jersey. There may be other articles – although not necessarily for North Brunswick, New Jersey – that may need the full two-part dab in order to be unique, and then we will have different dabs. I'm fully aware that two rules clash here: as short as possible, and as consistent as possible. I think consistency takes priority.

We may end up with the following:

  • X (North Brunswick)
  • Y (North Brunswick, New Jersey)

That's not disirable. HandsomeFella (talk) 22:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. Spekkios (talk) 01:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:12, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting shouldn't be needed really. The guideline at WP:NCPLACEDAB is pretty clear:
In some cases, including most towns in the United States, the most appropriate title includes the non-parenthesized state name as a tag, even when it is not needed for disambiguation.
HandsomeFella (talk) 13:44, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The guideline is clearly not clear enough for you, the subject is not a town. For illustrative purposes though, let's say it is a town. The guideline is stating that the correct disambiguation would then be Elmwood Cemetery, New Jersey (cf. WP:USPLACE). The better guidance to use is found a bit further down: When tags are required for places in...United States, use the name of the state. So Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey) is correct. -- Tavix (talk) 14:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See my response to BD2412 below. HandsomeFella (talk) 19:52, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was a previous RM that had consensus to move to the proposed title so arguably it should have been returned to that title before this discussion was started, that said the previous RM was over commas v brackets rather than if the state was needed so I'd argue that the previous undiscussed move was OK. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:22, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The article was moved to its current title in 2019, and has been stable for three years since then, so that's more than enough time that it requires a fresh RM. As you say, the previous RM was not regarding the same issue anyway.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:34, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Follow the main discussion over at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Two-part place-dabs.
  • HandsomeFella (talk) 21:56, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey). "New Jersey" is much more WP:RECOGNIZABLE than "North Brunswick" and it would retain a WP:CONCISE title. Elmwood Cemetery only shows one in New Jersey, and a cursory search did not turn up any other non-notable ones. -- Tavix (talk) 14:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support using "North Brunswick, New Jersey" per WP:PLACE and WP:CONSISTENT, see Elmwood Cemetery. Thanks, Zeete (talk) 11:16, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. WP:CONSISTENT doesn't apply to disambiguators, given that they only need to be as precise as necessary to identify the subject. As I stated in the other conversation about this, we have for example [[Kaká (footballer, born May 1991), which specifies a month of birth, versus Danny Mills (footballer, born 1991) which doesn't, because there are no others born that year. Thus, similarly, if some places need disambiguating with city and state, then so be it, but only if that's necessary. Otherwise, keep it as short as possible. Nobody will recognize "Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick)" who doesn't also recognize "Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick, New Jersey)". Re the other proposal, to move instead to Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey), I'm neutral on that one. It's just as concise as this, so happy for it to go ahead of that's the consensus.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:28, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe WP:CONSISTENT should apply to disambiguators, I don't see why not.
    "[G]iven that they only need to be as precise as necessary to identify the subject" – by "identify", do you mean only as precise to make the name unique? If so, would simply (North) be sufficient as a disambiguator if there's no other city or town named North-something with an Elmwood Cemetery? Sounds crazy to me, so what do you really mean with "identify"?
    Also, with "Nobody will recognize 'Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick)' who doesn't also recognize 'Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick, New Jersey)'", you're actually making my case. People who don't already know of North Brunswick, New Jersey, on the other hand, how would they possibly know where North Brunswick is without the state qualifier? HandsomeFella (talk) 21:03, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • UPDATE. There is actually a guideline for this: WP:NCPLACEDAB. Among other things, it says:
In some cases, the article title should include additional text, such as a country name or province name, for example, Paris, Maine or Red River (Victoria). The additional text is called a disambiguation tag. The disambiguation tag provides context to the reader, and helps uniquely identify places when multiple places share the same name. The following general principles apply to such tags:
  • In some cases, including most towns in the United States, the most appropriate title includes the non-parenthesized state name as a tag, even when it is not needed for disambiguation.
I guess the matter is settled then. The RM should proceed and page be moved. HandsomeFella (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The part you have bolded is the guidance for American towns to include the state name in it's title even where it's not needed. It's why the article title for the town is North Brunswick, New Jersey and not North Brunswick (which redirects there and is thus unnecessary for disambiguation purposes). However, we're not talking about the town, we're talking about the cemetery. In this case, North Brunswick is not needed for disambiguation purposes because this is the only cemetery in New Jersey with the name. Thus Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey) is the most appropriate name because disambiguation should only be as precise as necessary. -- Tavix (talk) 15:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
1) No, we're not talking about cemeteries. And we're not talking talking about towns or cities either. What we're talking about is disambiguation tags. The tags have the name of a town, and – I repeat – the most appropriate title includes the non-parenthesized state name as a tag, even when it is not needed for disambiguation. So you're simply wrong.
2) So you think all cemeteries in the Portland categories below – and all other articles dabbed in a similar way – should move from e.g. Evergreen Cemetery (Portland, Maine) to just Evergreen Cemetery (Portland) and River View Cemetery (Portland, Oregon) to just River View Cemetery (Portland), respectively, because that's only "as precise as necessary", and because people generally know that Evergreen Cemetery in Portland obviously must be Portland, Maine, and that River View Cemetery in Portland obviously must be Portland, Oregon? Really.
There are no like-named cemeteries in the two Portlands, so according to you, all should be renamed to less precise names.
I think you need to re-read the guideline. And reading the discussion over at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Two-part place-dabs could also be useful.
HandsomeFella (talk) 00:12, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I find this is impossible to follow with all the bolding and underlining. Bolding needs to be reserved for the action you wish to see. You're getting way too far into the weeds, so I will disengage. -- Tavix (talk) 19:37, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I divide my replies into paragraphs, use bullet points, and underscore the important parts – and that makes it hard to follow? Ok. HandsomeFella (talk) 21:18, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's better than the current title, but it's a pattern that is better suited for rivers and mountain ranges (as also mentioned in WP:NCPLACEDAB), which rarely exist within a single county, let alone a city or town. That is not the case with cemeteries, which are almost always located in a locality (city or town), though occasionally straddling city limits in densely populated areas – like New Jersey.
Noone has suggested Elmwood Cemetery, New Jersey, so I think we all agree that that shouldn't be the title.
Speaking of cities and towns, Tavix is right insofar as the guideline only mentions towns. But as towns and cities follow the same naming convention (Place, State), I don't see why we shouldn't follow the same guideline for the dab tag. If anyone knows why it only mentions towns, let me know. I haven't been able to find an explanation. And unless Elmwood Cemetery straddles city limits (whether from the start or as a conseqence of dividing a locality in two), I think we should follow that for the sake of consistency, even though there likely is no other Elmwood Cemetery in New Jersey. It would indeed be peculiar if a cemetery in a town was named Elmwood Cemetery (Town, State) while a cemetery in a city was named Elmwood Cemetery (City) or Elmwood Cemetery (State).
HandsomeFella (talk) 19:52, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Case closed, RM can proceed as proposed. The matter now seems be settled. I asked a question on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Question why the guideline said "town", and not "city". And quite quickly, several editors responded that this was wrong, and soon agreed that the more generic word "settlement" should be used, and that it covers cities, towns, villages, hamlets, boroughs, unincorporated communities, ghost towns, and census-designated places. The guidelines has been updated accordingly, so the move can proceed as proposed. HandsomeFella (talk) 17:54, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • ...but not cemeteries, so the guideline you're trying to use still doesn't work. Again, the guideline you're referencing would result in it being named Elmwood Cemetery, New Jersey if it did apply. -- Tavix (talk) 18:11, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Jesus. You're missing the point entirely. As I said once before – and I really thought that you had got the point back then, but boy was I wrong – we are not discussing cemeteries. We are discussing dab tags. To be more precise, how the dab tag is determined, whether for cemeteries or something else. The guideline tells how the dab tag is to be constructed. Do you get it now? HandsomeFella (talk) 18:38, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes, that guideline tells how the dab tag is to be constructed for articles on settlements. This article is not a settlement, but a cemetery. Therefore, the guideline you're referring to does not apply. Got it? -- Tavix (talk) 18:45, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      No, that guideline doesn't tell how the dab tag is to be constructed "for articles on settlements" – it describes how the dab tag is to be constructed when the dab tag itself is – or refers to – an article on a settlement. It baffles me how someone can misunderstand something so completely, and for so long, without it being deliberate. You said you were going to disengage, but you were apparently neither disengaged nor engaged enough to read properly. Read again, and maybe the coin drops (finally). HandsomeFella (talk) 18:55, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Ok, I just realized why you're missing it. You're reading the sentence itself only, thereby losing the context; the section heading is "Disambiguation". HandsomeFella (talk) 19:05, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes, we are clearly talking about disambiguation. More specifically, what to do about a cemetery that requires disambiguation. -- Tavix (talk) 19:17, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      (edit conflict) Maybe I'll try zooming out a bit: the disambiguation tag does not even need to refer to a settlement. Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey), my preferred article title, does not refer to one. I disengaged when you got a bit too into the weeds before with a bunch of off-topic TL;DR and bolding, but you keep "updating" the nomination with more and more novel ways to misinterpret the same guideline that I felt needed to be corrected. If you're not going to get it, then fine, I'll stop trying. However, if you "update" the nomination yet again, I reserve the right to respond accordingly. -- Tavix (talk) 19:17, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relister comment – In my opinion, there seems to be a consensus against retaining the current title, but no consensus over whether to move to Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick, New Jersey) or Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey). I'm relisting for a second time in the hopes that some new people will see this RM and break the deadlock, since it'd be a shame to close as "no consensus" when the current title is least preferred. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:12, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support (repeat) using Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick, New Jersey), which satisfies all five WP:CRITERIA, as noted above. The consistent format to disambiguate cemeteries is "Cemetery Name" ( "Community Name" ). The community name for this cemetery is North Brunswick, New Jersey. Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick) is inconsistent and neither recognizable nor natural. Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey) is also inconsistent and neither recognizable nor natural (not a state-wide cemetery). Thanks, Zeete (talk) 10:55, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Zeete: You have already voted above, there is no need to repeat yourself. Please strike one of them. -- Tavix (talk) 12:52, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • A close as "no consensus" when the current title is least preferred should result in a move to the most supported of the options. -- Tavix (talk) 12:52, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      As I mentioned on WT:NCPLACEDAB, I admit to having misread the guideline as covering the dab tag only, while it isn't so. I stand by this RM anyway, though I of course cannot rely on WP:NCPLACEDAB as an argument.
      As I have otherwise argued, this proposal is supported by 1) common sense, 2) preciseness, 3) consistency.
1) It's only common sense that the cemetery article should be disambiguated with North Brunswick, New Jersey, because that is the name of the article on the settlement itself.
2) Neither North Brunswick nor New Jersey are precise enough.
3) We need to have consistency in dab tags, both across articles that have them, and in relation to the main article the dab tag refers to. If we look at the dab tags of the cemetery articles in the two Portlands I mentioned above,
Category:Cemeteries in Portland, Maine, and
Category:Cemeteries in Portland, Oregon,
according to Tavix' reasoning all of them are too precise, and should thus be renamed to Xxxxx Cemetery (Portland) because there is no likenamed cemetery in the other Portland. This is of course utter rubbish.
HandsomeFella (talk) 16:37, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you misrepresenting my arguments. I thought I have made it clear that I am in favor of using the state rather than the city to disambiguate, especially when the city is ambiguous like Portland. "Xxx Cemetery (Portland)" would not be recognizable. The consistency argument is simple: consistently use just the state to disambiguate. Only when there are multiple things in the state with that name, use both the "settlement" and state to disambiguate. I don't understand why you think "New Jersey" is not precise enough? This is the only "Elmwood Cemetery" in New Jersey, so it fits the mantra that the disambiguation tag only need to be as precise as necessary to identify the subject. Elmwood Cemetery (New Jersey) easily and concisely identifies that this is the cemetery in New Jersey, and "New Jersey" is a recognizable place name. There's no need to clarify that any further. -- Tavix (talk) 17:01, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am fine with using "(New Jersey)" as the disambiguator. I strongly oppose using "North Brunswick, New Jersey" as that is unwieldy and entirely unnecessary. I suggest if a NOGOODOPTIONS is chosen that we go with the simple state name, it seems to have some support above.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:17, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a good option, use "North Brunswick, New Jersey". The consistent format to disambiguate cemeteries, noted above, was established by WP:CONSENSUS by many editors creating many articles. Cemetery disambiguation pages show this. There is no need to establish a new standard. An earlier title for this article used "New Brunswick, New Jersey" to disambiguate. The community should have been "North Brunswick, New Jersey". Also, see Category:Burials at Elmwood Cemetery (North Brunswick, New Jersey). Strongly oppose using the inconsistent "New Jersey" tag. Thanks, Zeete (talk) 10:07, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elmwood_Cemetery_(New_Jersey)&oldid=1204824366"