Talk:Westbury-on-Trym

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Bristol Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bristol, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bristol-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.BristolWikipedia:WikiProject BristolTemplate:WikiProject BristolBristol articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	At least one photograph is included in this article
	This article has a map
	This article has an infobox

Requested move 24 March 2024

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: not moved. Participants provided sources showing that usage was split between sources. Supporters pointed to sources including maps and the Ordnance Survey, but some concerns were raised about that methodology, including the risk of WP:OFFICIALNAME or of double-counting map platforms that rely upon each other's data. Opposition pointed to the usage in various government and news sources. Both camps showed examples of local sights and businesses using their preferred styles. Reviewing the debate as a whole, I believe the discussion ultimately resulted in a consensus that the hyphenated name is better attested in sources, and is thus the WP:COMMONNAME. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Westbury-on-Trym → Westbury on Trym – Per Ordnance Survey, article already mostly uses "Westbury on Trym" in text etc. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Crouch, Swale (talk) 07:44, 24 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 14:37, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The provided rationale doesn't seem very explanatory. For example, we have Stratford-upon-Avon. What's wrong with the hyphens in this case? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ngrams show that the hyphenated form has always been more common, including almost to the present day. [1] And the local road signs use them too (see maps.app.goo.gl/gAi1EGSVPZmxq5QMA). So I'd definitely be inclined to leave as is. The Ordnance Survey choice is not the definitive answer. — Amakuru (talk) 00:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amakuru I'll see that and raise you this. Also Google Maps, Bing Maps, and OpenStreetMap don't seem to use hyphens (where they do for Stratford-upon-Avon). I'm not reading too much into Ngrams. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:44, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And this. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also the Co-op. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Methodists. Am I overdoing this :D YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not C of E though :( YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Funeral directors don't like hyphens. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's all rather nice. Some sources name it without hyphens, I don't think there's doubt about that. But more name it with hyphens, so that's what we should go with. I'm not really sure what anyone's hoping to achieve with this move or why it might be desirable. — Amakuru (talk) 21:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You've seen my list. Where's yours? And don't say Ngrams. YorkshireExpat (talk) 22:33, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly a Google Scholar search seems to suggest that the move to no hyphens is recent i.e. I can only see sources without in the last 20 years or so. And asking what anyone hopes to achieve with this seems to undermine the entire point of Wikipedia :D YorkshireExpat (talk) 22:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BarrelProof and Amakuru:. Crouch, Swale (talk) 07:44, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per all the map apps, Ordnance Survey, and at least some street signs. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:44, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Definitely divided usage. The school. The church. The Methodist church, proving it's even divided among the same organisation. Estate agents. St Monica Trust. The village hall. Therefore, no good reason to move. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Will go weak support. I still think Ordnance survey should carry some weight though. YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That could be said to be WP:OFFICIALNAME at the very most. Not really even that. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not an official name. There's no such thing in the UK. Ordnance Survey is an authority on this though. YorkshireExpat (talk) 12:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which was my point! OS may be some sort of authority, but it does not trump local usage. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But when local usage is split surely Ordnance Survey should break the tie? YorkshireExpat (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is hyphenated in addresses according to Royal Mail, and in the names of the former ward[2] and the current ward of Westbury-on-Trym and Henleaze.[3] These are probably more official than Ordnance Survey, which occasionally has non-standard or incorrect spellings ("Minister Gates" for Minster Gates in York). Peter James (talk) 17:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, we shouldn't be using OS alone, they're literally having a massive correction programme in Wales because they know they have errors. Per below, the council (at least for the conservation area) and all? local publications use hyphens. Dank Jae 17:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the fact that they take it seriously is a good thing, no? YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
still don't understand the preference, as the local council uses hyphens. What makes OS the arbitrator? Dank Jae 18:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What makes the local council the aribtrator? YorkshireExpat (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not stating they are, but they are the authority most connected to the place, and their use likely has a larger impact than OS, as well as representative of public use than basically a database entry. I didn't argue to use the council alone, but local and national publications, as well as the council, use hyphens. Dank Jae 19:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could make a similar list with national and local concerns. The usage is split, even in our organ. I guess what makes OS the arbitrator is an Act of Parliament, and maybe sometimes WP:COMMONNAME needs a tiebreaker. YorkshireExpat (talk) 19:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Place names are not mentioned in the Ordnance Survey legislation, whereas they are in legislation relating to local government wards. Royal Mail usage is split, the address database has it hyphenated both in the name of the delivery office and as a locality of the post town Bristol. Peter James (talk) 21:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If anything I'd argue that gives the OS more weight. Local government seems to have to remit to make changes to place names based on its own whims. Whereas OS policy states the way they name things is guided primarily by local usage and custom, i.e. in much the same way that our policy says that we should. YorkshireExpat (talk) 07:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our policy is common use not local use, and if OS uses something different from the council which is probably the first authority contacted, then how can they be using "local use"? Dank Jae 07:55, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't comment on OS's methods, and I suspect they aren't infallible (and neither, God knows, is local government). Also, for small places like this local use will drive common use, and "local use" wouldn't work as a wide ranging Wikipedia policy. Both hyphenated and unhyphenated appear to be common. I don't think this is getting us anywhere. YorkshireExpat (talk) 10:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Overall usage appears split, but major RS like the Ordnance Survey, Google Maps, Bing Maps, and OpenStreetMap, plus various local sources as noted, favor the non-hyphenated form. As such it seems appropriate to follow suit. ╠╣uw [talk] 17:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per above, the argument pushed is WP:OFFICIALNAMEy, Ordnance Survey is not the definitive source for "correct" names. Wouldn't rely on maps too much, they may all rely on each other, Bing has OSM data etc. The council [4], Bristol Post, BBC [5], ITV, Bristol247, The Independent, Sky, GloucestershireLive, The Guardian, UoB and Bristol World all use hyphens. Even if we were to push "official name" in disputed cases, why would Ordnance Survey take priority than the actual local authority/use of the area. Plus Wikipedia represents sources not physical signage, which may be adapted to actually fit on the sign. Dank Jae 17:29, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, the hyphenated form seems to be more common in sources. Blythwood (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2024 (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.