This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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 within the scope of WikiProject Catalan-speaking Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking Countries 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 within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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 within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles 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.
People writing about Minorca and Majorca should be aware of the fact that writing Majorca but Menorca is etymologically inconsistent, as the major and minor in them is not a coincidence. :-) (Just for those who don't like to appear ignorant.) --Maladroit
These comments were potentially offensive to the many British readers of this page. Even more offensive was the failure to use the English language correctly. I have deleted the comments for these reasons.
I have just cut It was called Nura by the Phoenicians in honoring their god Baal, meaning the "island of fire". off the lead section for I believe it doesn't really belong in there. Besides, the relationship between Baal->island of fire->Nura should be explained, as it is not self evident.
Generally speaking the article is particularly weak precisely in paleolithic and phoenician times, which, historically speaking, are probably the most relevant of the island after all. It would be necessary some development of these in the History section. Mountolive 00:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
"(Menorca both in Catalan and Spanish; from Latin Balearis Minor, later Minorica "minor island")"
Does anyone have documented evidence of the islands name in English? If you check an English atlas, generally it will be called Menorca. If you look for references on Google there are 16 million for Menorca and only 2.7 million results for Minorca.
This is an English language page. So, should the name of the Island not be the name it is known by in the English Language? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
You have to be careful when doing Google searches because it will give all instances of the term in all languages. I checked 3 different dictionaries (Random House , American Heritage , and Webster’s ), and they all have the spelling of the main entry as Minorca. MSN Encarta , the Columbia Encyclopedia , and Britannica  all have it under Minorca. I don't have it with me right now, but the Atlas I have at home gives both the native and English names for each place, and Minorca is given as the English name. You will see people using the native spellings even in English, but according to the official sources I checked, the English spelling is Minorca. Kman543210 (talk) 16:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I go on holiday there A LOT and have to say that it is the most beautiful place in the entire world!!! User 08burgelaura —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 19:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Based on this discussion, I have undone an undiscussed move of the article to Menorca. I suggest getting consensus here before moving it again. --John (talk) 23:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived discussion 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 proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 20:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
User:Yerevanci, why does your ngram include so many sources about the 18th Century? We are in 2013. the same ngram with "Minorca is" vs "Menorca is" shows, not surprisingly, the same results as Google Books searches, that the name for the modern island in English sources is the modern name. The British colonial era is over, the island was relinquished in 1802. Minorca still is more common in English language sources concerning the 18th Century, yes but I ask you the question; is Minorca still more common in English language sources concerning the modern island? What does the revised ngram show? In ictu oculi (talk) 19:31, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, first of all 1800s is 19th century as long as I know. Secondly, why are you looking at 1800s? As you can see on your own graph, Minorca is still more common, isn't it? Was it a rhetorical question? --Երևանցիtalk 01:52, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
User:Yerevanci, thanks for coming back, perhaps look at page 7, or indeed 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 of those Advanced Book Search results. What they show is not just that "Menorca is" is more common than "Minorca is" overall, but when excluding 1708-1802 traffic within "Minorca is" then "Menorca is" is more common, much more common. Menorca is the WP:COMMONNAME for the modern island in sources since 2000, or indeed since 1990. Please exclude content related to the British colonial period. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:45, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm talking about Google Ngram Viewer. If you are arguing that "Minorca" is an archaic term, then set the range from 1990 to 2008. Minorca still surpasses Menorca. Additionally, Google Maps uses calls it "Minorca Island".  --Երևանցիtalk 04:02, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
User:Yerevantsi, how does your search subtract books 1990 to 2008 talking about the British colonial period 1708-1802? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:30, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Google Maps uses the 18th century form too? --Երևանցիtalk 04:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
User:Yerevantsi, my question is how does your search subtract books 1990 to 2008 talking about the British colonial period 1708-1802? You've included a lot of 1990-2008 content on the napoleonic wars in your ngram. Compare this search:
Which is the more common spelling concerning the island today in books since 2005? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:30, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
And You left my question unanswered. "Minorca" has historically been used in English language sources. Just because "Menorca" hits more in the past 5 years or so doesn't make it more common or more correct. --Երևանցիtalk 04:45, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry I don't know anything about Google Maps or whether it is counted as WP:RS. Yes "Minorca" has historically been used in English language sources, "Minorca" still is used in English language sources to describe the British colonial period. I don't understand how if "Menorca" hits more in the past 5 years it doesn't make it more common. I would have thought 940x to 584x is more common by definition. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:53, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
As I said "I don't know anything about Google Maps or whether it is counted as WP:RS" so sorry I cannot help on that one. But I don't understand your point about "Your research" - do you mean "Your research" of the Google Book results above? Yes, per WP:RS "reliable for the statement being made" then Google Books since 2005 would more reliable for usage in books since 2005 than searching books before 2005, of course. Columbia is 1963, Haggett is 1993. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:07, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Whatever you feel like calling it. So what they are from 1963 and 1993? And what are your reliable sources? I yet have to see a source that is more authoritative than your research. --Երևանցիtalk 18:31, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
1963 and 1993 are the publication dates. It is not "whatever [I] feel like calling it" we don't call a GB wikt:search "wikt:research," these are two different terms. You are welcome to run the numbers through Google Books yourself, but see below, you will get the same results, such as 1970-1980 "Minorca is" was 2.38x more common, but 2010-2013 "Menorca is" was 2.34x more common. Same question as to Dohn joe, this is a trend, so is there any doubt which way the trend has moved? In ictu oculi (talk)
You perhaps didn't read my entire comment. I clearly stated that we need reliable sources. I don't care what the trend is. I'd much rather use the old form which is more acceptable than follow the trends. --Երևանցիtalk 01:29, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
I did read it. Regarding trends/changed usage, out of interest are there any examples of Armenian place names which were known in English by the Russian/Soviet name until recently but are now known by the Armenian name? In ictu oculi (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Place name change is different. We're talking about spelling here. --Երևանցիtalk 03:04, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
User:Yerevanci Can you give an example please. Akdamar Island we use the Turkish spelling rather than Armenian Akhtamar. Are there not any examples of where the change in English has gone the other way from e.g. a Russian spelling to the original Armenian spelling? In ictu oculi (talk) 03:19, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
In fact I have found List of renamed cities in Armenia. Are there any of these renamed towns which had notable historical events happen at them which are more common in English sources than references to the modern town? In ictu oculi (talk) 03:25, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
You're taking this conversation to somewhere else. All you do is repeat yourself. There is a reason why 3 other users have also voted oppose. Maybe you should just sit back and read my and their arguments. Have a nice day. --Երևանցիtalk 03:42, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
User:Yerevanci yes but you haven't yet opposed, that's why I'm talking to you. I cannot explain why the other 3 editors have opposed - given that is clearly evident that modern sources like Lonely Planet generally do not use the British colonial spelling when discussing the modern period. even Frommers has abandoned the British colonial spelling (see also Amazon.com). I am taking this conversation somewhere else, to a general practice across all Wikipedia to use the names as in the most recent English sources. We do this for Armenia, Turkey, etc., the only area we don't do it for is Kosovo, which I believe is a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS problem rather than abiding by best en.wp practice. But why should we doing it for Menorca? The British are long gone. Why should Wikipedia have a different name than Lonely Planet? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:23, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
If you wish to argue that historical names be used for modern geo articles then should Jonesboro, Georgia be moved to agree with Battle of Jonesborough 1864? Sources in Google Books mentioning Jonesboro overwhelming use the old name Jonesborough, since a big battle happened in a little place. Going further back sources mentioning Greek Smyrna and Nicea overwhelming outnumber modern İzmir and İznik. There's no rule of consistency of names in Wikipedia between place names of history articles and modern geo articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:31, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Which is why I'm saying it's best to use Advanced Book Search. The ngram was only presented as contrast to Yerevanci's ngram including napoleonic history, etc. The Advanced Book Search was done taking out Wikipedia's own shadow from Google Books by using "-Wikipedia -LLC". If you know how to do "-Wikipedia -LLC" on a ngram search then please link it, but an ngram including Wikipedia and LLC should not be advanced as evidence over Advanced Book Search which can take out "-Wikipedia -LLC". Also the ngram only runs up to 2008 visually, wheras Advanced Book Search transparently presents 5 years more data, up to 2013.
Not a concern. Books LLC didn't show up until 2009. So Google's ngram viewer (which does stop at 2008, as you mention) does not include Books LLC. And in any event, Wikipedia mirrors and Books LLC are a tiny fraction of the results. Repeating your searches without excluding "Wikipedia" and "LLC" only adds about 9 new results, out of 1,029 total. That's less than 1%. Dohn joe (talk) 22:49, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Well the more accurate tool gives "Menorca is" since 2000 = 620x vs. "Minorca is" -Wikipedia = 410x so time spent discussing the less accurate tool and how its logs work, its smoothing, its inclusion of Wikipedia, its omission of last 5 years or not etc. etc. etc. is adding zero to the RM except fog. The Advanced Book Search is more accurate, and 620x is more than 410x. Another reason needs to be found to oppose use of the usual name for the modern island in modern English sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:01, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
"The more accurate tool"? None of these tools are "accurate"; they're all approximations to give us some glimpse into reality. Google Ngram Viewer is accurate enough for the Royal Society.
You would need to provide reliable sources for that statement, I have seen discussion but not conclusion.
What I did just notice in that search - page 7, was that my rule "Menorca/Minorca is" is not actually excluding all the references to 18th Century British Minorca. Even searching "Minorca is" on page 7 of the search the results include "One broadside lamented that 'Minorca is lost; and America too ", (i.e. 1775 not 2013) "Malham's Naval Gazetteer gives the following description of this place:— The bay or port of Mahon, in the island of Minorca, is situated at the eastern end" (i.e. 1814 not 2013) "The Minorca is gone with a convoy of Cotton-ships of Barcelona, for the Maltese cannot exist without this trade to Spain." (18th C, and about a ship) "Flesh meat at Minorca is neither very plentiful nor very good" (18th C naval record), "the Minorca is of Spanish origin" (about a chicken), in fact only 2 or 10 results on page 7 of the "Minorca is" search were talking about the modern island. So reduce "Minorca is" results down to 20% of the result number. By contrast page 7 of the "Menorca is" search, all 10, 100% were about the modern island. I challenge anyone to flick through the "Minorca is" and "Menorca is" results from 2000 and say the result isn't evident. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Challenge accepted! I went through your searches (well, I did "Menorca is" -wikipedia -llc just to match the Minorca search), and clicked all the way through, looking at each entry, subtracting duplicates and false positives for both names, and subtracting chickens and contemporary 18th-century quotes from the "Minorca" results. I tried to be objective, but feel free to try it yourself. I'd be happy to reconstruct my findings on a more granular level if you like. Here's what I found.
I'd say the result is quite evident - an almost even split, certainly a statistical tie. These results confirm to me that both spellings are current in reliable English-language sources. With the meta-searches also split, I don't see a compelling reason to change the title. Dohn joe (talk) 04:09, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
1970-1980 "Minorca is" was 2.38x more common, but 2010-2013 "Menorca is" was 2.34x more common. This is a trend, isn't it? Is there any doubt which way the trend has moved? In ictu oculi (talk) 01:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi In ictu - once again, I need to point out the faulty use of raw Google Books returns. Please click through each page of your search and let me know how many returns are truly there (not the first page estimate, which is often wildly inaccurate and unreliable).
As for a trend, since 1980, yes, there has been a noticeable shift towards "Menorca". However, if you look at any of the ngrams, or examine the Google Books searches, you'll find that after about 2000, that trend stops, and the two spellings are thereafter found relatively equally. I already showed above that in 2012, there were 6 relevant examples of "Menorca is" and 5 of "Minorca is". If you look at 2000, you find similar results: 6 relevant results for "Menorca is" and 6 for "Minorca is". Almost no change over the past decade and a half. Thus, no current discernable trend. Dohn joe (talk) 02:15, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Okay, well, we'll let other users click those same book searches and see if they see a difference between 1970-1980 and 2010-2013. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Oppose Quantitavely, while "Menorca" is becoming more common, "Minorca" is still dominating, as shown by ngrams and search results above. Qualitatevely, Minorca has been the accepted English name; in my opinion "Menorca" is not so much an alternative English name as an hispanism (or is it a catalanism?) walkvictor falktalk 05:35, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Oppose. Even if I were to accept that Menorca is slightly more common now (Which is not clear at all, per Dohn Joe), there's enough uncertainty - plus the inarguable truth that Minorca was more popular for such a long time - that we should stick with the current title. Maybe things will be different in 10 years. SnowFire (talk) 06:36, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Sorry User:SnowFire, but I doubt things will be different in 10 years since things were already different 20 years ago. The Google Books clearly show sources about the modern have already switched from the British colonial name to the Spanish name around 1990. Can anyone explain why "Menorca is" since 2010 = 347x uses rather than "Minorca is" since 2010 = 148x shouldn't be followed? I find this inexplicable. We follow name changes with other geo names, why shouldn't Google Books usage 347x vs 148x be followed? Why should this one article be stuck in time following 1980s sources? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:23, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
user:victor falk, same problem again; how does using "the" instead of "is" exclude results about the 18th Century and British Minorca? The whole point of the RM is to identify the name used in modern sources of the modern island, we are in 2013. How does a "the" search work comparing "Jonesboro the" to "Jonesborough the"? Should Jonesboro, Georgia be moved to agree with Battle of Jonesborough? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:57, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Hm, sorry? The period is set through google search parameters, in this case 2010-13. (Incidentally, I think that "contemporary" should be within "living memory", we are not all teenagers with no memories of 911, periods like 2000-2013 or 1990-2013 are more suitable. Not to mention that such a short period as a couple of years introduces sampling problems.) The point of using "the", "is" and other Most common words in English is to evaluate actual usage in real English sentences and reduce bias compared to just searching for word X/Y. I made a few searches with different common words and periods stretching back to the 1950s. What you can see is that while there is a clear trend for "Menorca" becoming more and more common, it is still not dominating. walkvictor falktalk 03:31, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Victor, thank you - your comment "a clear trend for "Menorca" becoming more and more common, it is still not dominating" is the first recognition of the trend. I think we agree also that no one today writes of "Minorca's beaches" (sic) "Minorca + seafood" (sic) and so on. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
User:In ictu oculi: In general, I don't think there's a problem with using names heavily used in old sources - in fact, this argues as a reason to use the "old" name. I am only grudgingly okay with Cordova being at "Córdoba" for example, and I believe that modern usage has turned much more decisively toward just using the Castillian form. Basically, for my own personal preferences, I'd either want to see a huge preference shift in recent times (say an 80/20 split or better since 1990), or else a consistent trend toward one name being more common (a 60/40 split since 1900, perhaps). I'm still not convinced (per other links offered here) that the modern usage has turned so significantly as to merit moving the article. SnowFire (talk) 04:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Strong support of all. We may disagree from time to time, In octu oculi... but I've got your back on this one. Menorca is clearly the modern-day common name in English for the island. I would also support a move request for the larger island, for what it's worth. RedSlash 03:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Red Slash - good to see you. May I ask how you find that "Menorca" is clearly the modern-day common name, given the reams of searches and sources presented in the RM showing that "Minorca" is still used by all sorts of sources in all sorts of contexts? Dohn joe (talk) 07:23, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Alongside the Google books results In ictu oculi gave, it's more based on my own personal experience. I know of very few English speakers who write about or care about the Baleares (what are they called in English? Balearic Islands?) who refer to it currently as anything else. My experience has always been that in English, the endonym was ubiquitous and the exonym unknown. I never would have known such a name existed as "Minorca" were it not for Wikipedia. What is the island's main English name? For me, "muhhNOURcuh", which shares the Catalán/Spanish spelling. I do not think this argument is extraordinarily convincing and do not expect it to be. I do have a better one though.
Take note of that big city in Turkey. I don't know how you could weed out RS's that refer to "Minorca" in historical terms--see this ngram showing Constantinople is STILL more commonly used than Istanbul, and I've never seen any serious request to move it back to Constantinople (a request that you and I both know wouldn't have a snowball's chance of passing). Again, "reliable sources" FAR more commonly write about Constantinople than Istanbul. That means very, very little about what the name is. I think it's Menorca. RedSlash 01:54, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
That's an excellent point. However, it is possible to go through actual search results and weed them out "by hand" as it were, which I did at some point in this discussion....here, in fact. I found that if you exclude references to chickens and 18th century journal entries, the current usage by sources is pretty well split. Give it a try yourself and see what you come up with. Dohn joe (talk) 02:57, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Oppose. Per Dohn Joe's links, modern usage is mixed. Historically speaking, Minorca is more prevalent. So there's no real compelling reason to move the page. Hot Stoptalk-contribs 23:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Oppose per WP:UE as illustrated by users above. Usage has not yet tipped in favour of the foreign-language name. If it does, the issue can be revisited in the future. As far as the travel guides &c. mentioned in the sections below go, travel guides generally tend to use native names more frequently than other sources. Wikipedia, however, should determine usage on a larger base of sources. — AjaxSmack 00:54, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Ajax - could you link to a specific search above which excludes references to Nelson and chickens which shows Usage has not yet tipped in favour of the tourist name. This request is made in good faith of you as an editor I highly respect.
"European Union" has been selected to weed out tourist books (although Lonely Planet got through the filter due to its history section which most tourist books wouldn't have). Even with the tourist books weeded out, has usage tipped? What is the more common name in sources discussing the European Union since 2005. At the most I would think these results call for neutral, since it is obvious we're going to move all the articles to Menorca anyway sooner or later. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Your searches seem to prove my point. Almost all of the links on the first page for Menorca are for travel guides while those for "Minorca" represent a much wider range of sources. — AjaxSmack 03:25, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Well yes that is undeniable, even after attempting to exclude travel books with "European Union" travel books still dominate. If the word "travel" had been used it would have been 9,700 to 1,900. I don't know what we can do about this. Menorca is mainly known for tourism, excluding travel from searches is like searching Liechtenstein without "banking." The other problem is print runs. It's evident from Amazon.com that all the Menorca books are printed in runs of 10-20,000s. There are still around 400,000 British visitors to Menorca every year which means 40,000 Amazon.com guidebooks sold. Wheras I doubt Institutions of Modern Spain: A Political and Economic Guide was printed in a run of more than 2,000. A hit for Menorca is 10,000 copies. But even counting 1 copy for 1 hit, Menorca is still in the majority (when Nelson and chickens are removed). In ictu oculi (talk) 04:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Oppose, this is English Wikipedia, not Spanish or Catalan Wikipedia. Arms Jones (talk) 15:45, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
To be fair, "Menorca" is found in many English-language sources, too. It just hasn't reached the same predominance as, say, "Livorno" over the traditional "Leghorn". Dohn joe (talk) 18:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, to the next passing admin, I request a relist when this comes up to the 7 days RM backlog to give a broader number of editors chance to comment. Although 3:1 indicates running this RM for a second week is not going to effect a move to the name this time, having a broader range of comment has to beneficial given that 10 articles are affected. In support of the relist I would also like to add [Easyjet flights to Menorca, [Flights from Manchester (MAN) to Menorca (Menorca)] and Amazon.com "Menorca" tourist guides to the RM template to give better visibility to the fact, I now realise an omission on the part of the proposer, to clearly state that "Menorca" is the name used by holidaymakers, travel agents, and Amazon.com's Tourist Guides. This RM has been bogged down in counting books about the Napoleonic wars rather than the simple name known to anyone getting on a plane. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:48, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
There is no reason to selectively use only sources that use one's preferred spelling. A brief glance at any of the searches provided above (including those provided by the nom) show that all manner of sources use both spellings - "Minorca" is not relegated to the 18th century. Even in tourism. Frommer's 2011, Fodor's 2013, Tripadvisor.com - all current sources that use "Minorca". Dohn joe (talk) 17:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Dohn joe, the evidence you have been presenting in this RM strains the limits of good faith. The title page of the Frommers guide on Amazon is clearly visible. That is an "e" not an "i" on the cover. Same for Fodor's - use Amazon.com to Look Inside 2012, 2013, that is an "e" not an "i":
Try putting in "Minorca Guide" to Amazon.com and it produces nothing (other than redirecting to guides to Menorca). No WP:RS tourist book calls Menorca "Minorca" any more - if you've found a website you've found a typo or a site that is inconsistent. If you're throwing up this in attempt to prevent a relisting with Lonely Planet, Frommer's, Rough Guide, DK Eyewitness, Marco Polo, Fodor's, Insight Guide in the template, the misleading example you just gave shows exactly why a relisting is necessary. I should have simply given Amazon.com as the rationale in the first place. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Remember that the amazon search engine is there not to help you find things, it's there to make you buy things. walkvictor falktalk 04:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for comment, although I think that's rather an unfair comment, I happen to know people who work for Amazon.com. The fact that Amazon.com helpfully allow readers who search for the old British colonial name to still find all the guidebooks to "Menorca" isn't "making people buy things", it is helping. If someone insists on buying a "Guidebook to Minorca" they need to go to a specialist second hand book store because the last time this name was used was the 1990 Frommers, and Amazon Marketplace doesn't have a copy. The spelling "and Minorca" also featured on the cover of the 1997 Frommers Spain. I believe that's the last time before Frommers caught up with the other guides. That is 16 years ago. In any case I don't see any objection to a relist, so thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:16, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
As regards the in-text of Fodor's you're right, they are inconsistent, I've struck. I see since 1990 they've used "Minorca" and "Menorca" all over the place. I've done paid editing work for 2 of the other guides on the list (not Spain admittedly) and would have assumed that Fodor's had the same quality control in place. Obviously it doesn't. But anyway this is a bit of a red herring I think. Out of 10 guides with "Menorca" on the cover, all have Menorca. 10/10. I understand that you mean well but I consider that zooming in on inconsistency in 1 book is more related to your own view on European names (to which you are fully entitled) such as in the argument you gave in your proposal to remove the "ç" from François Mitterrand → Francois Mitterrand — The clear majority of English-language sources use "Francois" over "François".. The arguments you're presenting here are basically the same logic, simply counting the gross number of sources without considering WP:CONTEXTMATTERS. When references to colonial Minorca are excluded what is left is modern Menorca. The fact that Fodor's are inconsistent isn't a justification for keeping the British colonial name, it simply means throwing Fodor's out for lack of proofreading. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
...and re the below you cannot take "means throwing Fodor's out for lack of proofreading" to change the fact that "No WP:RS tourist book calls Menorca "Minorca" - just look at the covers on Amazon. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:28, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Very good. I'm glad you acknowledge that your previous statement - "No WP:RS tourist book calls Menorca "Minorca" any more" - was not true. I needed to start with one book to show that . Now that it's been established, let's continue. Try these links:
Which of these sources, published since 2000, are about "colonial Minorca", and which are about the modern-day island? Do you still stand by your statement that "When references to colonial Minorca are excluded what is left is modern Menorca" ? Dohn joe (talk) 07:20, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Why are you listing books from 1927? The Balearics and Their Peoples 1927 - John Lane, you said yourself above there's a trend to Menorca. Can you please repeat your search using books mentioning "beaches" and "seafood" and "hotels" since 2000. Thanks
As to the question. Modern guidebooks to Menorca are better context to modern Menorca than books for example on Nelson because they're written for modern people getting on modern planes to modern Menorca. :)
Try putting "Minorca" into Amazon.co.uk and see what the 3 bestselling results are:
1. Nelson: The Sword of Albion by Dr John Sugden (27 Sep 2012)
2. Mini Encyclopedia of Chicken Breeds and Care by Frances Bassom (1 Mar 2009)
3. Beautiful Chickens: Portraits of Champion Breeds by Christie Aschwanden and Andrew Perris (3 Mar 2011)
Unfortunately, this is not "Menorcatravelguidepedia". We need to look at all reliable sources covering all subjects. You simply cannot continue to selectively cite sources that use your preferred spelling, and claim that the other spelling does not exist in modern contexts (or that every time it gets used it's a "proofreading error"). Victor and I have both shown specific post-2000 reliable sources that use "Minorca" in a variety of modern contexts (travel, economy, geology, etc.), and others have likewise shown searches that contain similar results. Lots use "Menorca", of course, too - and everyone on this page has acknowledged that. Why is it so difficult to acknowledge the reverse - that lots of non-chicken modern reliable sources continue to use "Minorca"? Dohn joe (talk) 17:59, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
I have requested the RM be relisted and that I wish to amend my RM rationale. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:59, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.