This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the
project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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.
The redirect was nominated for speedy deletion, after which the page will be moved to
Cẩm Phả. Diacritics are widely used in Vietnamese articles, and there is no reason they should not be used here. (In fact, not using them can lead to confusion, since different names can be spelled in the same way) (non-admin closure).--
Ymblanter (
talk) 07:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)reply
Support. When I reviewed the geography, I put the thành phố at plain titles on the theory that a thành phố corresponds to a city. The form "Foo District" has always been for the huyện and quân only. The Cam Pha in Hoi An is probably more notable than this one, but let's keep the titling consistent.Here is the city's site with thành phố Cẩm Phả on the top.
Kauffner (
talk) 16:55, 20 July 2012 (UTC)reply
Problem. I'm afraid I have to note that the present title is the result of an undiscussed move on 11 October 2011 - Cẩm Phả District to Cam Pha District which was counter the result of the only, as far as I know, RM which has been held on Vietnamese place names at
Talk:Cần Thơ/Archive 1 which was no consensus for such moves. If the rationale for this move is correct then the move should proceed from last stable version of this article to
Cẩm Phả in accordance with the 14 towns at the
Talk:Cần Thơ/Archive 1.
To cap it all, I see the town's (new) official English website spells itself Cẩm Phả - reflecting the upgrading in Vietnamese local sources we've seen in the past year with newspapers such as English Vietweek and websites like English Baomoi/VGP. It seems that these 1000+ undiscussed moves of Vietnam articles to "English names" have been happening exactly at the same time local vn sources have been improving their html and printing presses. I have added the town's English website as a source. Why didn't anyone else do this, hmm?
In ictu oculi (
talk)
I just mention that it has [district] or not, I dont care [Cẩm Phả] or [Cam Pha]. However, it is a city not a rural district, so we dont need to add the suffix [district]. Pleas see all cities are listed
here.--
Cheers! (
talk) 02:39, 23 July 2012 (UTC)reply
@
Kauffner (
talk). Sorry [Kauffner], I dont know what does it mean relate to Cam Pha in the phrase ...The Cam Pha in Hoi An is probably more notable than this one...?--
Cheers! (
talk) 02:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)reply
RMs are not common law precedents. We should be following the guidelines.
WP:DIACRITICS says, "follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language." That suggests the title should be "Cam Pha", per Viet Nam News, VietnamNet, and Rough Guide to Vietnam. Cf.
My Tho or
Da Nang.
Kauffner (
talk) 19:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)reply
Viet Nam News uses diacritics in their print edition, so Kauffner's assertion above is not entirely true. --
Obi-Wan Kenobi (
talk) 21:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)reply
Support with restoration of diacritics to Cẩm Phả.
Dicklyon (
talk) 22:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)reply
support to Cẩm Phả per nom and Dicklyon.--
Obi-Wan Kenobi (
talk) 01:56, 24 July 2012 (UTC)reply
Support to Cẩm Phả per Dicklyon. -
DJSasso (
talk) 17:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.
I have just modified one external link on
Cẩm Phả. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 18 January 2022).
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.