375:
be unsourced). The reality is that there is no standardized format for articles about places, so not all articles are going to include a note about how the place got its name, even if one were inclined to look there. And yes, there are times when we want to know the origins of more than one name and a comparative table is a more efficient way of finding that information. If you learn that
Chicago is a name of Algonquin origin, for instance, the question comes up about how many other places have Algonquin names; and a
328:
It doesn't have to be a choice between one format or another. One can have a table that shows the etymology of the names of cities, in addition to burying the information in some of the individual city articles. My only objection to this is that it's unsourced and poorly organized. However, there
374:
I don't see it that way. There are plenty of reference books that document the origins of place names, and its been a subject written about by authors such as Joseph Nathan Kane and Mario Pei, so there's no need for this to be original research (and, by the same token, no reason for this article to
202:
as noted per above. All US states have a page for county name etymologies (either a separate page or a part of the list of counties), so I think that the state-level idea proposed by
Editorofthewiki is a good idea. If such be done, this page should be created, similar to the semi-disambiguation
379:
table (this one is beyond fixing, even with sources) can reveal more than the copout that "It's an
American Indian word" (as if there was one American Indian language). When done well, reference tables can be an excellent supplement to existing articles.
90:
85:
94:
77:
176:
224:, for the exact same reasons mentioned above. This could be split up into state-level lists and this article makes the perfect starting point for that. Why delete the information in the first place then? --
123:
416:
389:
357:
338:
313:
287:
270:
251:
233:
216:
193:
166:
139:
59:
148:
Too broad in scope; I wouldn't object to it by state, but this is too much. Couldn't we just mention the origins in the city articles? Also, fails
130:
If this article is any indication, there aren't very many cities in the United States. Just another hodgepodge list, randomly stitched together.
81:
204:
343:
In my mind that one place would be the
Article about the city your interested in. To list all on 1 Article would then be attempting to show
406:). Is there anyone up to the daunting task of a userfication and rewrite though? Or do we let this one go and hope the next one is better?
73:
65:
261:
Way too broad in scope and not enough to tie the information together. This information is best served in the articles of the cities.
17:
295:- this should be handled on the Articles concerning the actual Cities. How a city got a name would be historical info about
329:
are occasions where readers are looking for information in one place, rather than searching one article after the next.
188:
433:
36:
238:
Delete because it's way too short — if we split up the current article by states right now, you'd see nothing for
432:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
278:
The etymology of place names is certainly an encyclopedic topic, but this is unsourced and poorly organized.
266:
183:
402:
Article is not worth saving. I would have no objection against a
Article written in the vein you describe (
159:
135:
385:
334:
283:
225:
262:
229:
407:
348:
304:
247:
212:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
239:
131:
398:
Good food for thought (as usual, seeing whom its from) but, I personally still feel that
381:
330:
279:
55:
149:
299:
city... ala ==History== section. Why create a second page about every city with info
243:
208:
111:
50:
426:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
347:
places ... that falls close to WP:OR territory, wouldn't it?
177:
list of United States of
America-related deletion discussions
118:
107:
103:
99:
74:
Origins of the names of cities in the United States
66:
Origins of the names of cities in the United States
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
436:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
175:: This debate has been included in the
303:on how it got its name? pointless IMHO
205:Lists of U.S. county name etymologies
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
417:23:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
390:12:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
358:01:06, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
339:14:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
314:00:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
288:14:12, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
271:11:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
252:05:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
234:10:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
217:05:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
194:01:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
167:01:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
140:01:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
60:00:25, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
453:
429:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
185:TwentiethApril1986
164:
44:The result was
415:
414:
404:AKA "do not salt"
356:
355:
312:
311:
196:
180:
153:
444:
431:
413:
412:
410:
354:
353:
351:
345:trends in naming
310:
309:
307:
242:, for example.
191:
186:
181:
171:
162:
160:editorofthewikis
157:
121:
115:
97:
34:
452:
451:
447:
446:
445:
443:
442:
441:
440:
434:deletion review
427:
408:
349:
305:
190:(want to talk?)
189:
184:
158:
155:
117:
88:
72:
69:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
450:
448:
439:
438:
422:
421:
420:
419:
393:
392:
371:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
360:
317:
316:
290:
273:
256:
255:
254:
219:
197:
169:
128:
127:
68:
63:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
449:
437:
435:
430:
424:
423:
418:
411:
405:
401:
397:
396:
395:
394:
391:
387:
383:
378:
373:
372:
359:
352:
346:
342:
341:
340:
336:
332:
327:
326:
325:
324:
323:
322:
321:
320:
319:
318:
315:
308:
302:
298:
294:
291:
289:
285:
281:
277:
274:
272:
268:
264:
263:Themfromspace
260:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
237:
236:
235:
231:
227:
223:
220:
218:
214:
210:
206:
201:
198:
195:
192:
187:
178:
174:
170:
168:
163:
161:
151:
147:
144:
143:
142:
141:
137:
133:
125:
120:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
428:
425:
409:Exit2DOS2000
403:
399:
376:
350:Exit2DOS2000
344:
306:Exit2DOS2000
300:
296:
292:
275:
258:
221:
199:
172:
154:
145:
129:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
156:one of many
132:Ecoleetage
382:Mandsford
331:Mandsford
280:Mandsford
226:Reinoutr
124:View log
276:Comment
244:Nyttend
240:Phoenix
209:Nyttend
91:protect
86:history
293:Delete
259:Delete
200:Delete
146:Delete
119:delete
95:delete
46:delete
122:) – (
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
400:this
386:talk
377:good
335:talk
301:only
297:that
284:talk
267:talk
248:talk
230:talk
222:Keep
213:talk
173:Note
150:WP:V
136:talk
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
56:talk
51:Cirt
207:.
182:--
179:.
152:. ~
388:)
337:)
286:)
269:)
250:)
232:)
215:)
165:~
138:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
58:)
48:.
384:(
333:(
282:(
265:(
246:(
228:(
211:(
134:(
126:)
116:(
114:)
76:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.