Talk:Ablekuma Central

Africa: Ghana Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Ghana (assessed as Low-importance).

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 2 external links on Ablekuma Central (Ghana parliament constituency). 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 20:01, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 December 2016

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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.

Moved as proposed; there is no remaining opposition to the proposal. bd2412 T 03:54, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

– Sole main title headers which bear these specific appellations, thus obviating the need for the parenthetical qualifiers. There is, however a caveat in that WP:Naming conventions (UK Parliament constituencies) states, "United Kingdom Parliamentary constituencies (current or defunct) should have a uniform suffix of "(UK Parliament constituency)" or "(Scottish Parliament constituency)" as appropriate, whether or not this is required for disambiguation. A redirect or disambiguation page entry must always be made from the basic name." Therefore, if the UK Parliament naming conventions extend to the entire Commonwealth of Nations, of which Ghana is a member, then this multiple page move nomination becomes a moot point and the main header should be moved from WP:Naming conventions (UK Parliament constituencies) to WP:Naming conventions (Commonwealth of Nations Parliament constituencies) or WP:Naming conventions (UK and Commonwealth of Nations Parliament constituencies). —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 05:20, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question Isn't it better to have a consistent standard across an entire class of articles rather than have different naming conventions? Hence, with the majority of constituencies that need (Ghana parliament constituency) after their name for disambiguation reasons, isn't it more useful to readers to have consistency across all constituencies even those which don't explicitly need the parenthetical? In other words, what I'm asking for is not a rule but a reason for having different naming conventions for a singular and limited class of objects. AbstractIllusions (talk) 14:51, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Questions of that nature are frequently discussed, both at talk pages of individual entries (and subsequent layers of entries) listed under Category:Wikipedia naming conventions, as well as upon Wikipedia talk:Article titles where the current discussions may be supplemented at a very high level by the contents of 55 archives comprised of exchanges going back to Wikipedia's founding year of 2001. Place names constitute particularly ardent topics for deeply-felt exchanges. Numerous examples may be submitted but, in general, the positive side of nominations such as the one currently under discussion lies in clarifying guidelines regarding application of naming conventions. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 20:15, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I read a few of the discussions before posting. I was asking more from your perspective on this particular move: Why do this? Is it just application of the guidelines or is there some advantage to reader/new editors in renaming these articles? If the goal is clarify standards, I think a more useful guide than to make the Commonwealth relevant to the issue (which is not justified in my opinion), then something like: If 90% of a class will require disambiguation, do it for all entries. I know the discussions over names likes going with the smallest consensus possible, but that seems to be the idea applied in the UK Parliamentary constituency debate and the U.S. City, State name rule. AbstractIllusions (talk) 03:19, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Continued at "Discussion", below. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 19:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support all Needless disambiguation. Number 5 7 10:19, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support all per User:Born2cycle/Unnecessary disambiguation. --В²C ☎ 20:33, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support all While I was hesitant at first, it is clear that the disambiguation are needless. AbstractIllusions (talk) 00:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

1) As far as the nominated articles [under the above-mentioned 28-page Category:Parliamentary constituencies in the Greater Accra Region] are concerned, there are four entries within that category (Ada, Adenta, Ashaiman and Weija), which already have links, thus requiring a parenthetical qualifier. Among these four, Ada, in particular, is a major disambiguation page, thus requiring a qualifier for Ada (Ghana parliament constituency), alongside Adenta, Ashaiman and Weija. The remaining 24 parliamentary constituencies, seen above as redlinks, have unique names that do not need qualifiers.
2) Under WP:Naming conventions, parenthetical qualifiers are only appended when necessary for disambiguation. Otherwise, most or all articles would have counterintuitive qualifiers requiring redirects [as an obvious example, upon typing Citizen Kane, one would be redirected to Citizen Kane (film)].
3) The above-mentioned exception, WP:Naming conventions (UK Parliament constituencies), may well be the subject of future discussions but, under present guidelines, it does specify redirects (Hornchurch and Upminster redirects to Hornchurch and Upminster (UK Parliament constituency)). If the UK guideline is applicable to the entire Commonwealth, then all of the above redlinks would have to become redirects (Ablekuma Central would become a redirect to Ablekuma Central (Ghana parliament constituency)), continuing in the same manner for all the other redlinks.
4) Finally, regarding the present nominations, it should be noted that this has the possibility of only representing the beginning. In addition to Category:Parliamentary constituencies in the Greater Accra Region [revealed by the still-active nomination Weija-Gbawe (Ghana parliament constituency) → Weija (Ghana parliamentary constituency) at Talk:Weija-Gbawe (Ghana parliament constituency)#Requested move 12 December 2016], there are hundreds of other such potential nominations all across the Commonwealth, starting with the pages under Category:Ghana Parliament constituencies, among which this Category:Parliamentary constituencies in the Greater Accra Region is only one of ten.
5) As a lengthy postscript, note should be made of the continuing discussions regarding distinctions between commas and parenthetical qualifiers. In addition to the just-closed nomination for Talk:Theodora (wife of Romanos I)#Requested move 6 December 2016), there are three still-active discussions regarding Agatha, wife of Samuel of Bulgaria → Agatha (wife of Samuel of Bulgaria), Maria, wife of Ivan Vladislav → Maria (wife of Ivan Vladislav) and Ælfthryth, wife of Edgar → Aelfthryth (wife of Edgar. In each case, the comma, of course, is part of the title, while the qualifier must be scrutinized as to its necessity.
The same arguments would arise regarding mention of place names, with naming conventions at WP:USPLACE specifying (for example) the form Ariton, Alabama, to which the unique name Ariton redirects. If the main header was structured as to include a qualifier (Ariton (Alabama)), we may argue that the qualifier "(Alabama)" is unnecessary because "Ariton" is a unique name, but due to WP:USPLACE, the comma–qualifier dichotomy, if such even exists, is not immediately challenged. This comparison would be applicable only in the unlikely scenario of a consensus to use the long form with comma, Ablekuma Central, Ghana parliament constituency, rather than the form with the qualifier, Ablekuma Central (Ghana parliament constituency) in order, quoting from above, "to have a consistent standard across an entire class of articles rather than have different naming conventions". —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 19:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thanks for spelling it out. I've looked over it, and my earlier 90% assessment was (way) wrong, it appears only about 30% for the whole country need the parentheses. That changes the case for sure. A consistency case doesn't appear to be justified here, and conciseness seems legitimate. AbstractIllusions (talk) 00:22, 15 December 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested moves need another review

Requested moves may create confusion

– I think the removal of the descriptive text (Ghana parliament constituency) is a wrong move. Sometimes names are not unique. There can be a district which bears a similar name to a constituency. Specifying with (Ghana parliament constituency) removes any confusion.

– If it's been agreed that '(Ghana parliament constituency)' will be removed, please then there should be uniformity. There are still constituencies like Yapei-Kusawgu (Ghana parliament constituency) that bear it and it's pure confusion for users.

A much bigger problem at hand

– There's a bigger problem that I think we should be focusing on. In the 2008 & then 2012 Ghanaian electoral years some of the parliament constituencies have been re demarcated – some have been split into two, three other constituencies, leaving precursor/defunct constituencies and host of identification problems which should really be a focus for speedy fixing.

For example Weija was and still is a town in Ghana. But there was a parliament constituency also known as Weija which seemed to not have a clear distinction. The parliament constituency Weija in 2012 was demarcated into Weija-Gbawe (Ghana parliament constituency), Anyaa-Sowutuom (Ghana parliament constituency) and Bortianor-Ngleshie-Amanfrom (Ghana parliament constituency). There are many of these problems swimming around on the wiki – and I am waiting on someone with administrator privileges to just 'get it' and allow name changes to be made for the defunct constituencies, and subsequent creation of articles of the new constituencies to logically follow.Please leave a message on my talk page if you want to help. sandiooses^TextMe 10:40, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]