Talk:Clanwilliam (County Tipperary)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
I disagree that the note is not necessary. The article "Clanwilliam" directs to a town in South Africa. I don't think that this would be the intent of most people. The barony predates all other towns and fish species by hundreds of years. It is entitled to a first place, but this was "robbed" by the South African town. The note is clearly necessary. I propose to undo this deletion unless somebody can convince me otherwise. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I think the point being made by the reverting ed. ( if you follow his/her link to WP:NAMB) is that an article named 'Clanwilliam, barony, Tipperary' could not possibly be mistaken for any of the other articles that incorporate the word 'Clanwilliam'.
I think a good case could be made that the Primary Topic should in fact be the barony rather than the SA town. A simple Google search gives a disproportionate return relating to Ireland/Irish topics, which clearly derive from the barony.(Google books gives great prominance to the SA town). Its a pity the barony names are not in the form 'Barony of Clanwilliam' etc. What would you think of the idea of changing them to this format? I also struck me lately that a space might be provided at town infoboxes including a link to its historic barony, in the way that they currently link to their provinces. What do you think? RashersTierney (talk) 21:10, 6 March 2010 (UTC)- Indeed you are correct. I removed the note from this article because anyone who visits "Clanwilliam, barony, Tipperary" is not going to be confused and expect to see something else. There is still a note on Clanwilliam linking to the disambiguation page.
- As to the second point - a google search for "Clanwilliam Ireland" returns many results that have nothing to do with the barony - they are results from streets named "Clanwilliam Place/Terrace/etc.", the "Clanwilliam Institute" and so on. A search for "Clanwilliam barony Ireland" returns 22,100 hits; a search for "Clanwilliam town South Africa" returns 124,000 hits. I have proposed on Talk:Clanwilliam that the primary article should be a disambiguation page, which I hope would be satisfactory for everyone (including Canadians!). - htonl (talk) 21:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, I have moved the SA town away from being the primary topic, and (for the moment) Clanwilliam redirects to Clanwilliam (disambiguation). On Talk:Clanwilliam (disambiguation) I have requested that Clanwilliam (disambiguation) be moved to Clanwilliam. - htonl (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Naming of this article
[edit]It occurred to me, shouldn't this article be named "Clanwilliam, County Tipperary"? According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Ireland: "Where disambiguation is needed, articles should go under [[placename, County x]]." - htonl (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- The coincidence of baronies and Counties is quite complex and they occasionally straddle several counties. Such a naming convention might give rise to more rather than less confusion to researchers esp. genealogists who are particularly interested in the records of the baronies. RashersTierney (talk) 22:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oh sure, but in this case the county name is already in the title, so changing the title to follow the convention isn't going to create more confusion, is it? Or am I missing something? - htonl (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I've only recently become involved in the baronies articles here, but their geography is difficult to follow sometimes wrt to parishes (Civil and Ecclesiastical) and counties ('traditional' and 'modern'). Naming onsistency wrt the other baronies should be the primary consideration. I have already made a proposal of renaming all of them in the format Barony of X' which would make them far less ambiguous since many Irish towns, townlands, and villages also share their (or very similar) names. I think other eds. could probably give you a more satisfactory answer when they come online. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 22:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Righto. It's really none of my business (or my interest). Thanks for the answers! - htonl (talk) 23:19, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Rashers has a point about the barony naming convention. Now that the pernicious usurpation by the South African town is out of the way, we should give his suggestion serious thought. One possible problem is that it will not give us an absolutely clean list. For example, we are faced with the problem that there is (incredibly) another barony of the same name in nearby county Limerick. This means that the names of both would have to violate the convention. You'd end up with something like "Barony of Clanwilliam, Tipperary" and "Barony of Clanwilliam, Limerick". But that's not so bad really. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:23, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Righto. It's really none of my business (or my interest). Thanks for the answers! - htonl (talk) 23:19, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I've only recently become involved in the baronies articles here, but their geography is difficult to follow sometimes wrt to parishes (Civil and Ecclesiastical) and counties ('traditional' and 'modern'). Naming onsistency wrt the other baronies should be the primary consideration. I have already made a proposal of renaming all of them in the format Barony of X' which would make them far less ambiguous since many Irish towns, townlands, and villages also share their (or very similar) names. I think other eds. could probably give you a more satisfactory answer when they come online. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 22:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oh sure, but in this case the county name is already in the title, so changing the title to follow the convention isn't going to create more confusion, is it? Or am I missing something? - htonl (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2010 (UTC)