The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The "keep" opinions, already in the minority, are pretty weakly argued. Dtilque goes on about the title. Carlossuarez46 asserts without backing in policy that "toponymy is a notable topic". Richard0612 tells us that this is a "valid subject for an encyclopedia", which is just a rephrasing of "keep". Legacypac tells us to "see the See also articles at the bottom cf the page", which isn't any kind of policy-based argument. None of these opinions address the policy-based arguments made for deletion: that the topic fails WP:LISTN. Whether that is true or not I have no idea, but I have to give determining weight to the arguments that are based in established policy and practice over those who are not. Sandstein 17:08, 25 May 2018 (UTC) reply

List of non-Canadian places that have a Canadian place named after them

List of non-Canadian places that have a Canadian place named after them (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be WP:Indiscriminate. Awkward title, and has been awkward. Unclear why it is notable - there are thousands of places around the world named after other places. Why are these ones from Canada more notable than others? ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 19:07, 23 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Every morning (there's a halo...) 19:18, 23 April 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep see the See also articles at the bottom cf the page. Legacypac ( talk) 19:56, 23 April 2018 (UTC) reply

• List of non-US places that have a US place named after them was created by the same creator as this article, and will be nominated for deletion as well. List of places named after people has been tagged with notability for standalone lists since 2012. I don't see your point ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 20:14, 23 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen ( talk) 01:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen ( talk) 01:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep there's an invalid assumption in this proposal for deletion. That is, that it's a list of Canadian places. Read the title: List of non-Canadian places.... This list is of places outside Canada. The Canadian places are there to show that there is at least one Canadian town named for that non-Canadian place. Most of the non-Canadian places are somewhere that someone migrated to Canada from, although there's also a fair number of places named for battles Canadians were involved. It gives a certain perspective on Canadian history.

This error is common enough that perhaps the list should be changed to one of Canadian places. That would mean multiple places named for the same non-Canadian town would be added. The list would not change that much, perhaps increase in length by 50 to 75% once all of them are added. The lede would have to be rewritten and it would fix the awkward title. The name could be something like List of Canadian places named for non-Canadian places. Dtilque ( talk) 03:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment this was previously discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of non-Canadian cities with a Canadian namesake. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 04:22, 2 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep how places got their names ( toponymy) is a notable topic and the article is in line with it. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:54, 2 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Delete, contents fail WP:LISTN as a whole, and thus individual entries are best discussed on their own article, not as a whole. Flibirigit ( talk) 03:21, 3 May 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep (valid subject for an encyclopedia) but rename to List of Canadian places named for non-Canadian places. Richard ⁰⁶¹² 09:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Struggling to figure out how place names that exist in two countries (one being Canada) is a notable list. Ajf773 ( talk) 20:14, 9 May 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete topic of list not covered in other independent, reliable sources per WP:LISTN, and I don't see how the topic would otherwise be notable. It's not even clear that all the Canadian places are actually named after the others - the references are just entries at GeoBase, which doesn't make any claims about the etymology of their listings. I found a pair ( Balaclava and Balaklava) where the Canadian one isn't named after the Ukrainian one (they're both named for the Battle of Balaclava). Teratix ( talk) 11:53, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment I'm sympathetic towards User:Dtilque and his reasoning after reading his comments, but I think criteria for inclusion needs to be tightened (the Canadian places must be strictly be named after the foreign ones). Definitely add that Alan Rayburn source. Did I mention the article needs to be renamed? Teratix ( talk) 23:51, 14 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Extra Comment (because I haven't figured out how to strikethrough yet :)) On further reflection, I'm going to stick with my previous !vote. The main issue with the article, as the relisting comment mentioned, is the notability of the concept (or lack thereof). So far, one possible source has been mentioned that devotes 'a section' of unknown length to discussing Canadian place names. I think we need to find more sources before declaring this meets WP:GNG as multiple sources are usually expected, according to the guideline. Tera TIX 13:33, 18 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment The references to the Canadian Geographic Names Database are just there to establish that the place does actually exist. They also have a reference in the 'Notes' column which establishes that one place was named for the other. Perhaps this is not the best organization of the entries; if you think so, make a suggestion for a better one. As for places named for battles, those battles were all named after towns they were fought near. That includes Balaklava, where the battle was named for the town, and the Canadian places (there's a couple with the name) were named for the battle. Perhaps they should be given their own list. There's a score or so places named after battles from various wars; some are not on this list because the battle was named for a river or other non-town. My rule when compiling the list was that any place named for something closely associated with a foreign city was to be included. There's no place to put such rules in the Wikipedia system, though. As for the topic covered in independent sources, how about Alan Rayburn's Naming Canada: Stories about Canadian Place Names. It has a section on place names coming from other countries. (BTW, I need to add that as a reference for Balaclava and several other entries.) Dtilque ( talk) 03:17, 11 May 2018 (UTC) reply
• Comments: I am struggling to see the importance and notability of this list as well as the other somewhat related lists. This list is primarily sourced from Geographical Names Data Base, others are far worse, but what is the actual encyclopedic use of this list? Otr500 ( talk) 12:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Extra comments: I also have reservations and concerns that were raised by User:Teratix with the example. One can be named after the other or vice versa "or" can be named after something else and without some vetting how are people to know? If there is confusion or false presentations we are just advancing junk. Otr500 ( talk) 13:09, 14 May 2018 (UTC) reply
    • Comment You're mistaken on this list being primarily sourced from the Geographic Database. While there are a number of cites to that source, every one of them also has a cite in the Notes column to another source that supports it being named for a non-Canadian place. Every single one! Now maybe that's overkill, but I figured people might want to know where the place was and those places do not have their own Wikipedia page. The Geographic Database has a map showing where the place is.

As far as how people should know, if they're editors of Wikipedia, they should be consulting references before adding anything to a page. Any page, not just this one. Unfortunately, there are far too many editors who do not do this, and I occasionally have to remove someone's mistaken additions. Dtilque ( talk) 22:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC) reply

I am still on the fence. I am not mistaken in that the article is predominantly "primarily sourced" but does have other sourcing. I see List of places named after places in the United States with one reference, List of place names of Native American origin in Virginia with no references, List of place names of Czech origin in the United States with no references, Lists of U.S. county name etymologies actually non-referenced or improperly referenced with an "External link", List of place names of French origin in the United States with two references, the very long List of place names of Spanish origin in the United States with only four references, List of Irish place names in other countries with zero references, List of Swedish place names in the United States with one reference, List of place names of Welsh origin in the United States with no references, and the "list" of under or non-referenced "list-class" articles goes on.

I see List-class articles can be of use and Wikipedia uses them, but failing to see the importance may be on my end. I do know that this article is among the better referenced. The title --- pretty much sucks. However, this can be changed. Otr500 ( talk) 15:10, 19 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• CommentThe Geo Database looks like it's the dominant source because there's a lot of individual references to it. However, most of the references in the list are concentrated in about 10 sources. Look at the first 5 references (especially #2 the one for Ontario) and note all the links to them. If these (and some others) were converted to individual refs, the page would have about 500 references. I thought that would be too extreme, so I didn't link to individual pages of those sources.

Notability: it's been established that the etymology of a place name is a notable piece of information (and I've been adding such to many wikipages for towns as I've researched this list) so a compilation of such data when they fall into a category should also be notable. Dtilque ( talk) 07:53, 20 May 2018 (UTC) reply

It may be true that the etymologies of place names are notable, but I'm not sure this specific type of list is. From what I can see, the sources in the article do a pretty good job of a) proving the places exist and b) proving the Canadian ones are named after the non-Canadian ones (mostly), but they don't establish the notability of the concept. Tera TIX 11:11, 20 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Delete No indication that the concept is notable, making this list basically a collection of OR/SYNTH. -- Randykitty ( talk) 14:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete - clearly OR and clearly cannot be completed. , Canada Road and Ottawa Road in Singapore is missing. Such lists just cannot stand as they are woefully inadequate, just as we don't have a list of Android Phones but we have list of features of Android Phones and so on. -- Quek157 ( talk) 23:12, 20 May 2018 (UTC) reply
• Comment Neither of those two roads would qualify for this list. They're named after Canada & Ottawa; Canada and Ottawa were not named after them. As it stands, the list probably has 80-90% of the actual total. But where is the requirement that Wiki-lists be complete? I've seen a fair number of incomplete lists on Wikipedia. Are we going to delete all incomplete lists on Wikipedia?

As for the accusations of OR/SYNTH, I think you need to learn what those are and are not. Start here: WP:NOR, then read Wikipedia:What SYNTH is not. Then come back and point out where specifically this list violates that policy. Dtilque ( talk) 05:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment I think what the users are trying to get at is not exactly WP:SYNTH, but rather a slight variation. You've said "the etymology of a place is a notable piece of information", which is true, and covered in reliable sources you have helpfully pointed out. However, just because one source says 'X, Canada was named after X, Australia' and another says 'Y, Canada was named after Y, USA', doesn't therefore mean a list of Canadian places named after non-Canadian places is notable, as no source has meaningfully covered the topic of the list. Sort of 'notability synth'?

Another imperfect but helpful analogy: 697 Galilea is an asteroid named after Galileo Galilei. The Galilean moons are also named after him. You can find reliable sources that back the statements up. But we don't have an article 'List of solar system bodies named after Galileo Galilei', because no sources cover the topic of the list.

According to WP:LISTN: "Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables. Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been." Tera TIX 07:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC) reply

strike out misunderstanding, the name is really esoteric and hard to understand. still sticking with my views though Quek157 ( talk) 08:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC) adding. the places are notable and not or but the entire list is sheer or. Sources are for the place but the list have no sources for itself, so that or Quek157 ( talk) 10:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment It seems to me that the real problem with the list is the name is awkward. That was the reason this AfD was started; they just said 'not notable' because 'awkward title' is not a reason for deleting pages. I've already pointed out that this topic has been covered by authors (see the book by Alan Rayburn I mentioned above, for example; I could come up with others). So let's change the title, which I've already suggested. Either List of Canadian places named for non-Canadian places or perhaps even more succinct List of Canadian towns named for towns elsewhere. If the inclusion of places named for battles that are named for towns is a problem, those could be extracted out to a list of Canadian towns named for battles. Dtilque ( talk) 17:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment An awkward name is trivial; a notability problem is serious. The original reason the AfD was listed was actually notability concerns: "Unclear why it is notable - there are thousands of places around the world named after other places.". If you can find more sources, why don't you show us them instead of stepping around the issue and talking about the name? Tera TIX 23:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC) reply

• Delete seems to me to be just a list of Canadian-related disambiguation pages.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 19:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC) reply
• Comment The originator said the name was awkward twice, which gives me the idea that that was the real reason he proposed the AfD. But the rename would not be trivial; it would actually expand the number of places that are valid additions.

As far as demonstrating notability by other treatments of the topic, I can't find many specifically Canadian examples, although there was some in Rayburn's book on Ontario place names. I checked it out from the library(ILL), so I can't reference it right now, but I do remember him saying there were 300-some places in Ontario borrowed directly from the British Isles. All of those are on this list. The US is the other major country where this phenomenon occurs and there's a good deal of discussion in George Stewart's Names on the Land (which is about US place names), especially, but not exclusively, starting at the bottom of page 237 and going for several pages. Another example is specific to one state: Our Storehouse of Missouri Place Names by Robert Lee Ramsay has an extensive section on such names, both those borrowed from other states and from other countries, sorted by geographic region like this list. That reference is in Googlebooks, so you can look it up yourself. Those are the examples that immediately come to mind, although with some work I could find others. Besides those works, I frequently see people list the numerous towns in Maine and sometimes other states that are borrowed from abroad, mostly capital cities and other major cities, but also names of countries. At any rate the topic is certainly of interest to many people, which I would hope makes it notable. Dtilque ( talk) 05:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.