Talk:Street name

This article was nominated for merging with Street suffix in the past. The result of the discussion was to not merge.

On 22 May 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Street or road name to Street name. The result of the discussion was moved.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Abbreviations

Hi, how about including abbreviations like Rd = Road, Pl = Plaza, Sq = Square, Pde = Parade, Ct = Court, Gdns = Gardens La = Lane, Drv = Drive, Clo = Close, Grn = Green, Gt = Gate, Pa = Path? I was looking for that without success. Thanx, --Flingeflung (talk) 11:17, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are those all standardized by Royal Mail or the like? — US Postal Service standard for Drive is DR. —Tamfang (talk) 21:57, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. I believe Wikipedia should explain things like "Ct" at the Ct page. In order to do so, given how many of these two- and three-letter pages are disambiguation pages, we need a "landing page" which mentions them all. (You can't have disamb entries that doesn't link to articles mentioning the search term, or other editors can and will remove these entries). At the moment, I'm holding off to see how the current merge proposal ends. CapnZapp (talk) 10:20, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the obliteration of Georgetown

For example, when the community of Georgetown ceased to have even a nominal existence independent of Washington, D.C., the streets in Georgetown were renamed as an extension of Washington's street-naming convention.

Georgetown continues to have a nominal existence, I'd say, in that there continues to be a place named Georgetown. How about: "As part of the final integration of Georgetown into Washington …" —Tamfang (talk) 08:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

autoarchive

I propose automatic archival of this talk page, and will set it up shortly assuming no objections. Done CapnZapp (talk) 13:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was no change. CapnZapp (talk) 16:16, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that Street suffix be merged into Street or road name#Street type designations, per [1]. I want this discussed before I embark on adding/linking street name abbreviations that are not obvious. Personally I'm equally happy either way, just as long as I can forestall further attempts mid-work. CapnZapp (talk) 13:33, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support The street suffix article currently lists suffixes allowed in one random municipality, and USPS-allowed suffixes plus a bunch of randomly added others. Neither of those is encyclopediac or useful. Discussion of suffixes definitely belongs at Street or road name; if a list of all known suffixes is desired, then it can go at List of street suffixes or whatnot. (But frankly, we probably don't need that; suffixes that merely exist without any encyclopediac interest belong solely at Wiktionary.) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 09:07, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am not native to either the US or the UK. When I saw a street sign pic like "Culvert Ct" I had no idea what "Ct" meant. So I googled it with poor results. Then I searched Wikipedia for it. No results. Back to google, and finally I got it - it means "Court". Maybe completely obvious to you. Not to me. So I added it to the Ct page (=the CT disambiguation). But I got reverted with the "isn't mentioned at target page" argument, which, fair enough. So now I'm (slowly) adding these to a page where I thought they fit: Street suffix. But it got deleted for an unrelated issue;, what charitably could be called an incomplete merger proposal. This told me my chosen destination might not be stable. So, as a courtesy, as well to speed along a consensus, I started this discussion. Once this merger discussion has run its course, I know which page to continue this work at. However, please be advised I have no opinion on whether to merge or not, and I have no intention of closing the merger discussion myself. I am merely waiting for a resolution so I can finish my work at a stable destination. I have no intention of "randomly" adding abbreviations - all of them per the source will (eventually) be there. Please note the underlying reason: to be allowed to add them where they really are useful: the various articles on Aly, Anx, Arc... and Ct. CapnZapp (talk) 12:27, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over two weeks, User:Pi.1415926535, and no other editor has gotten involved - I feel you can go ahead and perform the merger now, making sure no information from either page is lost in the process. (If I don't see any further activity in this regard, I will instead assume nobody wanted the merger hard enough to do the work, and will remove/close the discussion instead. As I stated above, I have no opinion in the matter and just want the proposal over and done with so I have a stable destination for my upcoming work.) Cheers, CapnZapp (talk) 10:20, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As an alternative, you could add this merger proposal to WP:PROPMERGE in an effort to garner more feedback. CapnZapp (talk) 10:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That may be best. I don't believe that the lengthy listing of suffixes is encyclopediac or useful - it belongs more on Wiktionary than Wikipedia - but clearly it would help with your redirect project. This article isn't a primary interest of mine so I'm not really interested in putting forward a huge about of work on it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:40, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you're ready to abandon your drive to delete (merge) the Street suffix article, that's fine. Just tell me and I'll close this merge proposal, and hopefully I will have a stable target for my changes for the foreseeable future. (If you have any input on how to send readers to Wiktionary, feel free to share, just as long as a search for, say, "ct" here on Wikipedia leads the reader somewhere useful.) Again thanks CapnZapp (talk) 09:17, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll close this discussion with a no changes result if noone objects. CapnZapp (talk) 10:18, 9 January 2019 (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.

Requested move 22 May 2022

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Street or road name → Street name – There is evidence that the term “street name” is more widely-used. See pageviews, Google Trends, Google Ngrams and Google Search (2 million more hits). Additionally, the "or" seems unnatural and inconsistent with other titles. Cheers! 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 00:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support - In addition to the evidence provided by the nom, the proposed title also falls under WP:CONCISE. The current title is unnecessarily long, and there is no functional difference between a street and a road in this context. The proposed title conveys exactly the same information. – Epicgenius (talk) 01:46, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom and above comment. "Street name" is the usual term whether it's a street, a road, an avenue, a drive, a lane or a boulevard. Station1 (talk) 08:33, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the above arguments, especially WP:CONCISE. The current title is convoluted; we can include alternative names by bolding them in the lead section, as we do at other articles. There is no reason to hedge like this in the title itself. Toadspike (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. WP:CONCISE. BD2412 T 22:35, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Showiecz (talk) 18:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This RM assumes that the names of roads are the primary topic over the nickname senses. But are they? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:50, 29 May 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.