Jump to content

Talk:Derry

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 18:20, 21 October 2007 (Signing comment by 172.201.197.61 - "→‎Its "Derry" people: "). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Note to editors: the agreed compromise for the Derry/Londonderry name dispute is that the city page shall be titled Derry and the county page shall be titled County Londonderry.


On this talk page I reverted so[1]. Their are terms and language within that discussion that go off the point, your comments are paramount to an ethnic slur and theirfore I have removed them. You are invited to make appropriate relevant comments to this talk page (on the subject matter of the article bearing in mind this is not a blog for random thoughts) and other pages but bear in mind your comments maybe subject to removal and indeed will be subject to the laws in your jurisdiction, for instance libel laws. You may want to read Help:Talk page, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFY for starters. In summary talk pages are not a place to apologise or excuse for history, nor a place to trigger ethnic wars or make ethnic slurs. Djegan 14:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just to butt in here with a comment. In the years I've been on Wikipedia I have seen thousands of Djegan's edits and I cannot think of a single one that was made that wasn't a valid NPOV edit or in the best interests of Wikipedia. While Djegan may be from the Republic of Ireland he is one of the tireless contributors on Wikipedia that does indeed put his personal views aside (whatever they are, I don't know and it doesn't matter) and helps to present the information in a neutral and encyclopaedic manner. Wikipedia has an agreement in place concerning the naming of the city (see WP:IMOS) and all Djegan does is help maintain this policy. If you don't like it then try and bring up a valid discussion on the topic instead of accusing people of bein POV just because they put forward a more neutral perspective that goes against your personal opinion. Ben W Bell talk 21:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having now read more of Djegan's edits, I am inclined to agree with your point Mr. Bell. Djegan does appear to be quite neutral. As such I have deleted my own comments above. However, I made those comments originally, based on the fact that Djegan deleted some comments that I had made. My comments had in turn been made in response to somebody else's comments. Those comments were made by a person who was ridiculing the name Londonderry, and they were doing so from an Irish Republican perspective. Nobody deleted those comments. Djegan chose to delete my reply, but never considered deleting the original comments that had provoked my reply. As such I concluded that Djegan was an Irish republican sympathizer. I now retract that conclusion having read a wider range of Djegan's edits.

Regarding that website we do not place links on websites to maintain a "NPOV", I have no more intention of maintaing a nationalist or loyalist link - its simply linkspam not "personal views", dont attempt to take the moral high ground because you got burned here before - view the website, mostly links to otherwebsites and not substantial. Notwithstanding I will leave the link unless someone else removes it, but wikipedia is not a link farm either. Djegan 14:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding recent edits by Lapsed Pacifist whilst some of them are clearly pov, I believe that the edit as of 20:50, 31 December 2005 is acceptable the only infraction being over linking. As for the removal of two people these people are clearly of County Londonderry and not the city, so should not be in this article. Anyone in agreement (with me) as I am reluctant to start a revert war in his favour (without consensus)? Djegan 21:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The two names solution seems like a fair compromise at this point. However, it is almost certainly the wrong way round (I think anyone would tell you this, to be fair) - calling the city "Londonderry" and the county "Derry" would bring things much into line with actual usage.

Derry/Londonderry

Is it just me or does all this constant renaming of the two Londonderry/Derry articles from one name to another strike anyone else as a little childish?

Childish? Activists are trying to remove all vestiges of Britishness from a city. This is causing alot of divisiveness and ill feeling. Do you call that childish? (211.72.91.97 07:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Clearly we need a compromise everyone can live with. I suggest we call the county article "Londonderry" and the city article "Derry". Or vice versa if anyone has a strong reason to prefer it the other way.

The explanation at the start of each article that there are two names should of course be kept.

No-one is going to win a renaming war and it makes the encyclopedia look pretty unproffessional. -Ikari (3 Mar, 2004).

I would certainly go for county article "Londonderry" and the city article "Derry" if there is to be a compromise. The county has only been "Londonderry" officially, while the town/city has been "Derry" originally, "Londonderry" in its city charter, and "Derry" in its district council name so 2-1 to "Derry". It doesn't matter much, but stability would be sensible. --Henrygb 17:58, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

That would make sense. The way I set it up was to have the articles at 'Derry' and have the first word in the actual text to be 'Londonderry', which struck me as a typical Northern Ireland compromise - that way both sides could claim primacy. ;) However, this then resulted in someone moving both articles to 'Londonderry' without a change in the wording, then someone copy-and-paste moving it to 'Derry' and making it clear in both articles that Derry had primacy. Morwen 18:03, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)

If the name of the city is going to be called Derry there is a mistake 4 lines down where it refares to its as the old walled city of londonDerry.

The walled city is called Londonderry is called that because it was built (i.e. paid for) by Londoners --Henrygb 13:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the city is and always has been LONDONDERRY. Londonderry is the official and proper name. Shouldn't that be the name of the article? There is no such place as "Derry". That was a former city that no longer exists, Londondery being built in its place but because of political correctness and petty anti-British sentlement we have to put up with a bogus and offensive name for the place? Let's not forget Ulster is BRITISH. Why should we have to compromise? Londonderry is its name by Royal Charter, a position that has not been revoked and hopefully never will be. YourPTR! 11:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both names are actualy wrong it should be called Doire and we should be arguing over whether to call it Doire or Derry adding a London at the end is just too long a name . Dubhead

Right... Like Baile Átha Cliath is the "real" name of Dublin?? Okaaaay!! Strangely Dublin still prevails...  ;-) The comparison could be made with Istanbul/Constantinople. The Greeks' road signs all point to Constantinople (which is the name I personally would prefer) but no-one does not accept that the city's official name is Istanbul. In my own view, this article should be called Londonderry, even although I use "Derry" myself interchangeably with it, until such time as the official name is changed. You have to recognise the reality of the official state of play, until such time as circumstances may change. What if the articles on St. Petersburg or Volvograd were called Leningrad and Stalingrad respectively, and this was presented as their current names? Or if I renamed the Dún Laoghaire article Dunleary or Kingstown? 132.185.240.122 15:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LONDONDERRY is the official name, and is what it should be called. The name Londonderry was passed in court as the official name when it was tried to be changed to "derry". As wikipedia is designed to be neutral, Londonderry should be the proper name for this topic, and not "derry", as this is favouring the people who call it the unofficial "derry"

This 'agreement' is a disgrace. The city is called LONDONDERRY under British law which both the UK and ROI governments recognise as the legal jurisdiction - in line with EU law which supercedes both. The county is also called LONDONDERRY. Only the Council area is named DERRY. Wikipedia should not allow itself to be used as a political pawn and should uphold information in line with the legal agreements in place. Poodler - 13/09/2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.229.156.40 (talk) 15:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doire

I'm of Irish republican descent and live in northeast England. "Londonderry", as a coal mine owning family and as a place, are anathema to me. Nevertheless when on wikipedia NPOV means I expect to use "Londonderry" when referring to the County or City in Northern Ireland. The city's local government has changed its name to "Derry City Council" but cannot (sadly (my POV)) change the name of the area. garryq 09:28, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Given that "Derry" is not the official name, it should not be used in the article title. "Londonderry" is NPOV, "Derry" is not. -- Emsworth 17:34, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Uber pedantry but isn't the area administered by the district council bigger than the traditional city? Timrollpickering 18:52, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Yes, you are correct. But the Council determines its own name, not the name of the region it governs. In any event, the article appears to concern the city, rather than the district. -- Emsworth
A general point of confusion - a lot of articles try to cover both the traditional area and the current unit of local government on the same page. But here the boxes certainly support this being about the district. Maybe we should copy the practice of Canterbury, Kent (Canterbury itself) and City of Canterbury for the local government area - how about Derry (district) to provide a page on the district in the same format as the other 25, and another for Stroke City itself? Timrollpickering 21:58, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
If the name of the district is indeed Derry, then by all means I would be open to having "Derry (district)" and "Londonderry." -- Emsworth 22:12, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Incidentally, to offer my opinion on the above "compromise": whilst the efforts to reach a consensus are laudable, we cannot arbitrarily decide an unofficial name is to be used. Londonderry is in the United Kingdom; therefore, we should go by the name used by the British government. The Republic of Ireland may purport to determine the city's name, but doing so would be similar to the UK deciding that County Offaly should be known as King's County. -- Emsworth 21:08, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Er... um... no it wouldn't. 70+% of the population of Offaly don't want to rejoin the UK... I suggest you look at the advice on British vs. American English before you dismiss that view out of hand.

The City/district split is an interesting name - except that the official name of the local government district is Derry City Council. Try disambiguating that one... Gerry Lynch 09:45, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What the people of Londonderry want to do is irrelevant. The fact is that the city of Londonderry falls within the United Kingdom, and it is that nation—not the Republic of Ireland—that may determine the name. Furthermore, this question has nothing to do with differences between British and American English. -- Emsworth 13:55, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
What the people of Derry call their city is entirely relevant (note Derry is the peferred form of around 70% of the City's inhabitants - the position of the Republic of Ireland is irrelevant). I note for example that the article on Kashgar is entitled Kashgar (as it is called by its local inhabitants), not Kashi (as the government in Beijing calls it) even though the Chinese name is written alongside it on the first line. The article on
The Wikipedia manual of style says that: Cultural clashes over grammar, spelling and capitalisation/capitalization are a common experience on Wikipedia. Remember that millions of people may have been taught to use a different form of English than yours, including different spellings, grammatical constructions or capitalisation. For the English Wikipedia, there is no preference among the major national varieties of English (American, British, Canadian, and others). However, there is a certain etiquette generally accepted on Wikipedia
and among these are: Articles which focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally aim to conform to the spelling of that country (for instance the British "Labour Party"). A reference to "the American labour movement" (with a U) or to "Anglicization" (with a Z) may be jarring. However, a reference to "the American labour movement" would be okay on New Labour. Believe me, ig you're taught that Derry is the correcy spelling, Londonderry is jarring (and no doubt vice-versa).
and possibly pertinently If an article is predominantly written in one type of English, aim to conform to that type rather than provoking conflict by changing to another. (Sometimes, this can happen quite innocently, so please don't be too quick to make accusations!).
In any case, to make quite a major change on what is a sensitive subject without at least seeking a degree of discussion and consent on the relevant talk page is bad form Emsworth. Wikipedia depends on consensus. If we make controversial edits without it, the long-term consequence of that is that we just spend all day reverting one anothers' edits. You've been around here long enough to know that. Gerry Lynch 16:53, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Accepting that each form may be jarring and offensive to those who use the other, one must now consider the question of neutral point of view. Using "Derry," perhaps, implicitly endorses the nationalist point of view. On the other hand, "Londonderry" is the name contained in the Royal Charter and is the official name. I do not suggest that official names be used always (as is the case with, for example, the article Calcutta), but here, where there is a dispute over the name, official status should lend some weight to one title. -- Emsworth 17:03, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Of course - but rememer these are equally political choices. Calcutta is perceived by many in India is a colonialist term (and interestingly the authors of Mumbai/Bombay and Chennai/Madras have used the Maharathi and Tamil names for those cities), Kolkata by others as the worst sort of politically correct gesture politics. Kashgar might be viewed as a term of Uighur nationalism; Kashi of Chinese assimilationism. This is where NPOV runs up against the brick wall of ethnic suspicion, I'm afraid. For example, saying that Londonderry is the name on the Royal Charter is hardly likely to convince people of its neutrality, at least not among the local majorty.
Personally I'm not that fussed - I wish this was all I had to worry about. Had the article already been at Londonderry I probably wouldn't have bothered but I didn't think it was quite cricket to move it without checking. Gerry Lynch 17:15, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I certainly apologise for not having checked, but I moved the page on the basis of Mr Quantrill's comments above. He made his post in April, and recieved no contradictory reply. -- Emsworth 17:26, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Would Derry/Londonderry or Londonderry/Derry be a workable answer? The article itself points to Derry being the more accepted colloquial term, so I'd go with the former. Wikipedia generally encourages the most used term over strict legal correctness, which in my mind renders the point about the Charter invalid as an umpire on this one. Timrollpickering 17:31, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I don't know of many people who use "Derry/Londonderry," so I don't think it would be an appropriate title. -- Emsworth 18:52, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
This article should be reverted to "Derry" (the city) not because of officaldom and posturing but because it was previously decided that it should be this way (as at the top), as a compromise in which several people took part - to reiterate what someone said at the time about renaming "it makes the encyclopedia look pretty unproffessional". "Londonderry" is the accepted name of the county, this is what it should be. Djegan 20:21, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
The previous situation was a compromise. Having both the city and county articles entitled "Londonderry" is not. And yes, the compromise does need to take into consideration the views of those in the Republic also - it is a matter of some great importance to many. zoney | talk 20:30, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
To name articles a certain way just to make people happy is ridiculous. Official polls seem to indicate, however, that common usage trumps official status. Consequently, I would not oppose a reversion on the grounds that Derry is the more commonly used phrase. But, in general, I do not support changing names just to please a few people. -- Emsworth 20:31, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Derry has of course been at the top of the news today because of the floods. The BBC refered to the city as Derry throughout. I hope this data point is useful. Pcb21| Pete 23:14, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You'll note usage in the article varies between using the two terms. This is the usual practice on BBC NI from what I've seen. zoney | talk 00:12, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


It should be noted that someone a few years back won a court case to get a parking ticket killed because it had "Londonderry" down as the city name, and the UK courts system ruled it didn't exist. I can probably dig up the article about it, I think it was after ireland.com started archiving. I think the fact that the UK courts system acknowledges the city is Derry and the county is Londonderry should set the precedent for whats done here

This is probably because the local authority is responsible for parking tickets and isn't named Londonderry City Council, but Derry City Council. It'd be as invalid as receiving a parking ticket in Limerick city with Limerick County Council as the issuing authority. But, then again, I'm merely hypothesising, I don't know for sure what the above situation was, or if it did happen. zoney  talk 13:16, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
On an unrelated point Derry Airport is officially called "City of Derry Airport". Djegan 16:51, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
So I moved it. But it is worth noting that its code is LDY and that its homepage http://www.cityofderryairport.com/ says it is located seven miles northeast of Northern Ireland's second largest city - the historic walled city of Londonderry. So they know a compromise when they want one. --Henrygb 02:15, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
You're probably right that they emphasized it as a compromise, but just as a historical aside, their usage is accurate. The "historic walled city" is a very small part of the actual city. It's the part that was built by settlers from London. 24.194.227.174 21:49, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I must say I'm disappointed to see that Londonderry's page is titled 'Derry'. A compromise would be fine if there were a genuine question over the validity of Londonderry's name, but there isn't, despite what the majority of its inhabitants might prefer. It all smells more than faintly of denial, frankly jamesgibbon 12:20, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
How did Nationalist gain control of City Council then?--Play Brian Moore 00:51, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
that was assuredly not a consequence of the city's name. jamesgibbon 22:14, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
By being elected by the population,l obviously. The name of the city is Derry in the eyes of the majority of its inhabitants, which its council makeup clearly shows, and in the eyes of the council itself. Its the name the Wikipedia is going to use, so you can be as dissapointed as you want, its not going to change anything. --Kiand 22:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here in the Republic all signposts pointing to it refer to "Derry" and that is what we call it. We just cannot use the name "Londonderry" because the term "London" being added to the old "Derry/Doire" name just feels too colonial - regardless of what the constitutional position of NI might be. Many Unionists in the North also call it Derry....except when the cameras are around of course. Even so, wikipedia is for everyone so leave it as Derry/Londonderry I suppose. And roll on the referendum! Peter O'Connell

  • And there's even the Apprentice Boys of Derry (sic) of which Ian Paisley is a member! Derry is the accepted, historic, cross-community name for the city. The L word is only used by British bureaucrats and colonialists, Unionists trying to score points, and those who know nothing about the place. 213.94.246.55 09:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The city" elsewhere in Wikipedia

The original compromise was to use Derry for the page title and County Londonderry for the county page title - it didn't cover the various terms in the article. I don't think anyone disagrees that officially before the walled city was built it was clearly Derry, then it was renamed Londonderry and still is in the city charter, but once Northern Ireland was divided into districts the local authority decided to call itself Derry City Council; local people understand both even if they use one or the other. It does look to me as if there is a trend towards some editors are pushing towards Derry excessively in the article and elsewhere, including in Template:IrishCities. Let's try to avoid a Gdansk/Danzig position where one side tries to obliterate any mention of the other's preferred name even for historical events. --Henrygb 01:34, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As a side note Henrygb, Northern Ireland has been in existance since 1921 and Londonderry's district council has only been officially called Derry City Council since 1984. However its official Royal Charter status can only be changed by the monarch so the city is still officially called Londonderry. As Londonderry resides in the UK and its official name is Londonderry, the article should be called Londonderry. Derry City Council can retain its name on its page as thats the councils official name - not the city's. Neutrality wise how can you object to the official spelling of the city? Mabuska 23:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Both terms should be used equally for this article.
For other articles (and I believe this is the main issue), it's up to the context. Most articles mentioning Derry, it has to be said, will be discussing the Republic or all of Ireland. So I think there is indeed probably a trend towards more use of "Derry" than "Londonderry". I don't think we can do anything about this. Perhaps a compromise would be to ONLY use Londonderry for clearly Northern Ireland topics?
zoney talk 08:55, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I have renamed the city "Derry" in the Template:IrishCities for consistancy - its not a matter of been pushy - the template is intended to be prominant and should use the accepted term - otherwise it is only a matter of time before it is reverted again - ultimately, as well, why cause anymore confusion? - i find the term "Londonderry" for the county both acceptable and historically preferred - lets not get to the point where we must slavishly use both terms to satisfy all sides - keep wiki professional Djegan 19:58, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
But the list in Template:IrishCities has Newry as a city because it received a city charter as Newry in 2002, even though it was and is in the Newry and Mourne District Council area. Not very confusing and quite professional. Template:Northern_Ireland has Derry because Derry City Council is the local authority name, in the same way as it has Newry and Mourne; Template:IrishCities should have Londonderry because that the city's name in its charter, in the same way as it has Newry. --Henrygb 00:12, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The town/city of Newry has never been anything but Newry, official or otherwise. "Newry and Mourne" is a district council, some might argue equivalent to a "county", but it has never been a town or city name.
In the case of Derry, it is different. There is Derry (or Londonderry) the city, County Derry or Londonderry, and the Londonderry district council area. Three distinct entities, of which Derry is acceptable for the first two (though we have the article at County Londonderry for the second item).
As regards Template:IrishCities, I can see that being an area of disagreement. As the Template:CountiesofIreland box uses Londonderry, I think it is fair enough that the city box uses Derry (by analogy to the article titles).
zoney talk 09:25, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Actually the Derry City district council area, which includes the City of Londonderry.
Ultimately I have no problem weither "Derry" or "Londonderry" are used, only consistancy should be the deciding factor - the name of the article should be used in prominant areas insofair as is possible - certainly the form [[Derry|Londonderry]] should not be used - decide on and keep one title, apply it consistantly in [[Template:IrishCities]], [[Category:Cities in Ireland]] and other important lists - similarily recommend the term "County Londonderry", whilst this term has no legal status currently it has a historical value Djegan 19:36, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The compromise was in fact for both Derry and Londonderry to be used in the article, and that the title would be Derry. The alternative would be a district page called Derry or Derry City and a city page called Londonderry - I think a single article is better than what has happened at Lichfield and Lichfield (district). There are plenty of links to County Derry, and maybe others to [[County Londonderry|County Derry]]; no doubt whoever wrote those articles thought it would be clearer to do that. But I still think that the city's name should be Londonderry in a list of Irish or UK cities. --Henrygb 22:20, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Fair enough that we are trying to distinguish between article usage and title - but still in the interest of simplicity, continuity, and professionalism it seams a good idea to accept one term for the city and whilst not insisting that this be used in every instance certainly do not use redirects uneccessarily - such as [[Derry|Londonderry]] - irrespective of what is decided here and now it is innevitable that this question will be reopened within 2-3 months by someone else - as to city and distict status maybe two articless are whats needed, but this is not what this discussion is primarily about - it is about the "City of Londonderry". Djegan 12:22, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
No, people did not standardise on "Derry" because that is the district name. People standardised on Derry as the city name too. There is no reason to consider splitting the page, as I would say that both would have to be Derry still (Derry the city, and Derry the district). I disagree with Djegan above though, I believe there are plenty of places where using [[Derry|Londonderry]] is perfectly warranted (Northern Ireland articles for example). However, I suggest that the city remains "Derry" in the city list box, as we already have "Londonderry" in the county list box. zoney talk 12:59, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Dispute revisited

I`m of Irish descent, and I certainly don`t call the city by the name of "Londonderry" in conversation... for one, it just takes too long. All the same, the city and county of Londonderry are part of the UK, and according to the United Kingdom government the name of these two places are "Londonderry" - there is no debate here. Maybe before the changes to Articles 2 and 3 we could debate the idea under the notion that these cities are part of Ireland and that the Irish naming stands. But from now on, unless the city applies to have the city`s name changed officially... it is Londonderry. --Ce garcon 05:11, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No, even officially speaking, it's not that simple - please read the earlier comments, and the page itself. The administrative district is "Derry City", which includes the "City of Londonderry". Meanwhile the city council is now "Derry City Council". Also the fact that Derry is probably the most common term for the city does count - regardless of the official royal title. We have discussed all these issues previously, with the end result of keeping the city at "Derry", but the traditional county at "County Londonderry" – which fits the reasoning above, and also happens to be a reasonable compromise. The actual article uses both terms throughout, and the two forms are both used elsewhere in Wikipedia as appropriate. zoney talk 12:05, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
These issues have been agreed previous - in summary using the correct or official name in wikipedia is not absolutely neccessary - very often their may be reason to use a more common, but incorrect form and the usual consensus is that this can only be overridden is where is it likely to cause offence - something which is quite unlikely. Djegan 09:46, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

City motto

Anyone know what this is? Googling is no help.

And yes, that is the city crest. Grim indeed.

zoney talk 00:36, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It all in an image [2]! Djegan 09:11, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
As far as local knowledge goes, the fort was Greencastle Fort in Donegal - just across the border and the skeleton was a DeBurca who was starved to death in the Fort. However during the grim days of Gerrymander in Derry people used to say that the skeleton was 'a Catholic waiting on the Council housing list'.... Derry humour eh? Bear in mind these were days of maybe 20 sleeping in a room in the Bogside with TB rife...SeanMack 17:51, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Recent developments, name

It has been reported [3]] that Derry City Council are inquirying into the legal status of the city name. Djegan 00:44, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I assume that was not an April Fool's joke, but the link leads to a blank page. Personally, I think splitting up this page has been a mistake - it now carries less information than numberous US township articles. --Henrygb 15:36, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Actually it was several days before that date that I came across the story, I will try to verify it in coming days and weeks. I agree with you on splitting this page, it was a severe backward step without doubt. Djegan 16:14, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Yep backward step, agreed... SeanMack 16:18, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
As an aside, I saw a note in the Sunday Times that the city council has taken the Department of the Environment to court over the city's name, so perhaps not an April Fool's? Alastairward 21:20, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise

Some proposals (IMHO unsatisfactory) from compromise have been proposed here, but since both names are used (one offically and one by a majority of its citizens and the local authority whose district includes the city) why not call the article Derry/Londonderry to have no precendence (other than alphabetically) or even (London)Derry? Redirects from Derry and Londonderry can be made and there would be no controversy/naming POV in the article. Dainamo 16:16, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The naming of articles is not a point of view issue, rather the relevant proceedure in this case, is naming conventions (common names).
Djegan 17:52, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could somebody explain to me why the people of Doire/Derry cannot just vote to change the name the coloniser put on their place? It is absolutely ridiculous that outsiders can determine the name of their place. It is time for the natives to wrest control of how they are represented from these British and their record-breaking egos.

  • This squabble is fiercest among the natives, dear boy. Outsiders and former colonisers are not particularly bothered what the place calls itself. -- RHaworth 10:24, 2005 July 20 (UTC)
IMHO it is a question of identity. All too often the problems in NI are viewed as a problem of religion. The two religion groupings closely mirror the two identities but it is not quite a 100% match. Catholics (in general) view themselves as Irish - in this context they are happy enough to accept the anglicised version of the Irish name Doire to Derry, but Londonderry is generally a step too far. Whereas the faction loyal to the Queen prefers to reflect their British identity and attitudes to the Union in the name 'Londonderry' (mostly protestant). If you think this naming issue is a problem have a look at the parades issue... Two competing and mutually exclusive identities battling for their voice to be heard. To reflect on the point made by RHaworth, many times, the ex-colonisers like to look on with part-disdain part-confusion wondering what to do with these two squabbling 'children' without really accepting the fact that plantation is the direct cause of the problem. Plantation was a very succesful political tool to divide and conquer the 'troublesome' North, however as is apparent, the inhabitants of Northern Ireland still live through the pain that this has caused for over 300 years and counting. When hot potatoes like the naming of 'stroke city' and loyalist parades are no longer an issue, there will be no need for third parties, paramilitaries and armies in Northern Ireland. At this point in time 'the end game' has not occurred. Until it does if one side gets a small win the other sees it as a big loss. Until the identity problem is resolved this will always be the case. Some have hoped that this will go away if those in NI could see themselves as Europeans - neither exclusively British nor Irish, but I fear that day is a long way off.... As I said it's just an opinion.... SeanMack 10:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
At the risk of getting off the point, I'd like to point out that the 'identity' issue is a symptom of the problems in the north, not it's cause. Too often I've been asked by interested foreigners "Why would religion cause such violence?". I think it's best to view the problems there as a result of the political transition which the UK as a whole went through in at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. Remember that until then, all over the UK, only people owning property could vote. Universal enfranchment did not come to Northern Ireland until the 1970's. Both poor protestants and poor catholics were equally excluded, and indeed the 1960's civil rights protests were a united front of poor northern Irelanders. However, the powers that be in the north had a tool which was unavailable to British leaders. They were able to exploit the ancient social fault-line that ran through NI society from the days of the plantations, and skillfully used it to divide the civil rights movement. By the late 1960's the artificially created 'identity' issue had split the civil rights movement completely, and layed the foundation for the troubles. Seabhcán 11:31, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I agree Seabhcán and I don't think it's off point. One only has to look at how Paisley has skillfully played this game to see how and dangerously it can be used for political gain. However I don't know that I would categorically state it was a symptom and not a cause. If I can stray a little? An abused person becomes a heroin addict and gets into crime. Is the heroin addiction a cause of their criminalty or a symptom of their abuse. Probably the moral is that with NI there are no simple black and white analogies and answers without looking back in history to see why we are where we are today. However the danger then becomes an identification with one side over the other in a situation that is most easily described as a tribal problem. The problem with NPOV and an encyclopedia is that it ignores the fact that with every divided issue there are two equally valid histories. The challenge for historians is to tease out the truth behind the headlines and view the present within the various contexts that have been forces in shaping the world as it is today. Maybe this is way off the point, but on the streets on Northern Ireland, for me, it is predominantly the working classes who are currently defining the politcal headlines, where you may as well substitute Celtic and Rangers for the political parties. Nowadays we have the DUP and Sinn Fein becoming more powerful. People are becoming more extreme and divided. Identity to me is *one* of the causes of divisions in the North and whilst we have a 'them and us' mentality there will never be any movement forward no matter what the politicians in Eire, Britain or the USA wish (never mind the middle classes in NI...). Once again just my opinion, not sure how relevant it will be to people looking in? SeanMack 15:36, 20 July 2005 (UTC) ...Let's not mention 'Danny Boy' versus 'Londonderry Air'... ;o) SeanMack 15:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That would be Danny Boy (written by an Englishman) and Londonderry Air (written by an unknown Irish person) --Henrygb 22:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I made the point in jest as there is a fairly complex history and I have been in company where one person has insisted it is Danny Boy and another insisted it was the Londonderry Air in a vain attempt at claiming ownership 'for their own side'.... SeanMack 11:42, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Name dispute

Surely if it is the wish of the majority of people in Northern Ireland to remain in the UK and they want that respected, then why is it that the Majority of Derry City (Doire, L'Derry) who are of Irish culture and beliefs, cannot have their city called Derry officialy?? Surely if Unionists wish people to respect their majority beliefs then they muct also do likewise for the majority peoples of Derry! --úsádaoir éireannach 01:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I have attempted to put this article at Londonderry/Derry but someone put #REDIRECT Derry on it. Can an administrator please do this?

It was proposed below that Derry be renamed and moved to Londonderry/Derry -195.188.51.5 11:32, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Score(Keep:22|Move:2)

  • Will we find some people will want Londonderry/Derry but others will insist on Derry/Londonderry? -- SeanMack 11:42, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I should not have to explain this but … I did the redirect because the page at Londonderry/Derry was a copy-and-paste of Derry. This is strictly forbidden in Wiki. The copy and paste operation would have destroyed an history of over 100 edits which have been applied to this article. I do not see any consensus for a move on this page. If the consensus is for a name change, an Admin must be called in to delete Londonderry/Derry and move the article on to that title.
My personal vote is keep the article at "Derry". -- RHaworth 14:16, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep as Derry because that is what the City Council says [4] --ClemMcGann 14:21, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, If we spent as much time contributing to the article as we did arguing about its name, it would be the best on wikipedia. Perhaps the solution is to have two parallel articles, Derry and Londonderry, edited by seperate people. Then, someday when we can agree and after hell has frozen over, the two articles, like the two halves of the city, can be merged. Seabhcán 14:37, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How about The city formally/currently known as Derry/Londonderry or The City known to some as Derry, known to others as Londonderry, yet to most, unknown. Seabhcán 00:26, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, I laughed with the hell freezing over bit though. I did think for a second that the 2 pages idea was a goer but then I thought about what would happen. We would have one page of murals in the bogside and another page of Apprentice boys and sieges..... What would people link to? Only link famous Catholics to the Derry page? I think the pre-agreed compromise of Derry for the City and Londonderry for the county is the most workable. However this revert issue will be difficult to resolve. Even if a compromise is agreed now, new people are always coming online. Perhaps a disclaimer at the beginning of each article stating why wiki has chosen the name would help people realise that this is now old ground in wiki and we would be better spending our efforts adding value to the article as Seabhcán stated already. Perhaps the relevant pages could start by outlining what compromises have already been reached within wiki. Maybe one of those nice html coloured boxes? If people revert after that they are the sort that will vandalise anyway... SeanMack 17:39, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Someone has been through this before I reckon... [5] the title of the page is <title>Employment Agency - Derry / Londonderry Northern Ireland</title>
  • Keep, The official name is not a absolute requirement when deciding on naming, as I have said previously (above) the requirement is for the most common name and Derry is the most common name. Djegan 18:24, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change, it is widely known by each of these names, by Derry here, by Londonderry in England and by both in the city itself.Notjim 20:46, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep It is not known in England by Londonderry. It is known by both names. Internationally it is mainly known as Derry. Derry as the most widely recognised name internationally should be used. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 21:40, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change Having the name "Derry" as the article's name implies a POV that this is the official name - the official name with royal status is "Londonderry", and the name voted by councillors is "Derry". The change removes all implications of POV, and will prevent future edit wars. What parts of the world have you been visiting to make such a bold statement that "Internationally it is mainly known as Derry"? - I would highly dispute this. On the overwhelming majority of international maps it is known as "Londonderry". I know from experience that in as far away as Japan it is known as "Londonderry"Jonto 02:53, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
the official name with royal status is "Londonderry" Actually Buckingham Palace has made clear that the Queen is not entering the debate and that the name of the city is a matter for the local council. And yes it is known internationally as Derry. That is a statement of fact. Only a small minority of people internationally call it Londonderry. (It reminds me of a unionist friend of mine who explained in detail how the name of the city is "Londonderry" and then went on all night talking about "Derry". He was mortified when I pointed out to him that even he wasn't using the name he insisted belonged to the place!) FearÉIREANN\(caint) 04:01, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I knew about that issue with the Queen not wanting to get involved, but I am not sure as to your claim that it was said that it "is a matter for the local council" - a source would be good. Perhaps "royal" was an unfortunate word to use, but in terms of the country "Londonderry" is official. I didn't say it wasn't ever known internationally by Derry. Your claim that "Only a small minority of people internationally call it Londonderry" is certainly extremely bold, and I would like to know what you are basing this on - perhaps recent trip to Boston - I don't know?? Do a google image search for maps of Northern Ireland, and I think you'll find a very different outcome.
You also misunderstand the main unionist position - most unionists don't oppose the term "Derry" at all, and use it simply because it is shorter with less syllables (actually meaning "'derry"). What unionists oppose is what they see as the petty nationalist determination to remove the word "London" from the title at all costs, and the complete refusal to use "Londonderry". The term "Derry" is also contained in the lyrics to The Sash.
Jonto 04:34, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I don't think that the outcome for this one matters too much given the "compromise". However, apart from preventing edit wars, I think that "Londonderry/Derry" is much more clear as to where we are referring to - I mean, where else in the world is there a "Londonderry/Derry" apart from in Northern Ireland!! I do also recall from driving on the road from Belfast to Dublin that there were signposts to another place called "Derry" in the Republic - this is not even mentioned on the disambiguation page!! Jonto 16:00, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Jonto having gone gray haired when driving in Dublin and it's environs in the past are you sure this wasn't just the usual abysmal sign posting? ;-) However while we're at it there is an island off the coast of Chile called Londonderry as far as I remember, yep found it, just did the obligatory google - http://islands.unep.ch/IXE.htm#323. SeanMack 16:18, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe lol - could well have been the bad signs, though it wasn't actually as far south as Dublin - I think it was somewhere between Dundalk and Drogheda (or aroundabout there). That chile one should probably be added to the LD disambig page then. The problem with clarity (if someone can confirm the other "Derry" that I'm sure I haven't imagined!) is that there is more than one "Derry" in Ireland! Jonto 16:38, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've found 2 "Derry"s in the Republic - one in (Sligo and one in Wexford (the latter may be a river). Though, this doesn't explain the signs that I saw on the Belfast-Dublin road going in the Dublin direction (maybe that sign was actually referring to "Londonderry/Derry" - I guess that's Southerners for you if it was! :P ;-) ). All this confusion now makes me actually strongly support the change to "Londonderry/Derry" for the sake of absolute clarity and nothing else. Jonto 17:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Or some 'Londonderry' boys thought they would turn the sign around to point to Dublin to confuse the poor 'Derry' boys? :-)) SeanMack 17:38, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
lol :-) Good one! Now that I think about it even more, I'm sure that I've actually stared at that sign (or series of signs) on more than one occasion and wondered where the hell they were referring to!!Jonto 17:47, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a thought, the official road from Dublin to Derry may be that 'Bastard Road From Hell' diagonally across the county towards Donegal. If you saw the sign around Dundalk it may have been telling you to go South towards Dublin then take the BRFM to Donegal/Derry. (?) I always thought Donegal was about as neglected by Dublin as Derry is by Belfast....
I think that must be what it is - I see a road that goes diagonally NW south of Dundalk to Londonderry via Monahagn and Omagh. I was really sad and using encarta world atlas measured the distance of 92.5 miles taking this road from Dundalk - the equivalent distance was 108 miles if you take the route east of Lough Neagh. I've never been along that road, but from the sounds of the "BRFH" it would be better go go east of Lough Neagh due to the better roads!! The Republic's Donegal link must be the answer.Jonto 19:36, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the "Londonderry boys" thought that the "BRFH" was enough punishment for the "Derry boys" to endure :) Jonto.
After taking my own advice and looking up maps for Northern Ireland and Ireland on google images, I am now of the slightly modified opinion (again) that the article should definitely not be called "Derry" due to the vastly overwhelming number of image results containing "Londonderry". Added to the confusion caused by there being more than one "Derry" in Ireland, and my own personal confusion caused by the lack of clarity of the term, I will either support "Londonderry" or "Londonderry/Derry" as the article's title. The council's administrative area is already officially called "Derry City Council" (see the Template:Northern_Ireland page on wikipedia where "Derry" is also used) and the airport is already called "City of Derry Airport" - these are two areas where the name "Londonderry" has already been compromised and already reflected on wikipedia, and therefore to leave the city's (note not council's but city's) name as "Derry" (unofficial), rather than using the official name is not in my opinion really a fair "compromise" at all. It also, sadly, crosses my mind in a very cynical way as to the actual reasons why people are voting in the way they are on this issue Jonto 19:36, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As for the road sign issue..didn';t you ever think that a Derry sign may be facing Dublin, becasue you may have to get off the motorway, in order to turn around (turn north) and the sighn is telling you that you have to drive south to get the turnoff?

  • Keep Using both names as the article title is simply unencyclopedic. Derry is where the article is, and there are enough redirects outside and statements within the article explaining the dual name. And there is plenty of precedent on Wikipedia (See Yoghurt, Gasoline) explaining why article titles only have one primary name, including those with which both names are quite common. In this case, the official name wins out. astiquetalk 03:39, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
"In this case, the official name wins out." - Which is the official name??(Londonderry)Jonto 05:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Continue with the compromise (i.e. keep this article at Derry and the county at County Londonderry for reasons given above, use both in articles, and keep calm. One of the many problems is that depending on your POV, your view of what the official name of the place actually is now will vary: district council v. city charter. It is very 20th century to worry too much about it; they did not before, and we should not now. --Henrygb 04:07, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep current situation. Editor should have asked before trying to move, but would probably still not have got agreement. – Smyth\talk 10:33, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Current situation (city article at Derry, but County Londonderry) makes sense and is a reasonable compromise to boot. The arguments for city article at Derry have all been gone through, but paramount among them are the facts that it is the most widely used term (even if just as a shorter form than Londonderry), both in the city and elsewhere, and that it is used by the local authorities. zoney talk 12:09, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Continue with the compromise. Only because the compromise of Derry for the city and County Londonderry for the county seems the most reasonable situation for now. – AxSkov (T) 13:44, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep at Derry - see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (identity). -- Naive cynic 15:27, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm... it seems that the official name is still Londonderry, and the city council hasn't changed it, as I mistakenly believed. So, the article should be at Londonderry. Of course, I still oppose move to any bastardized form, such as Londonderry/Derry. It's silly and ugly. -- Naive cynic 17:59, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep CGorman 15:39, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep tpower 20:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    It is worth noting that many of the "Keep" votes result from a little lobbying campaign among Irish editors by Djegan. --Henrygb 03:15, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have not lobbied anyone - I have written a message on the talk page of several wikipedians that I regularily work with informing them of the vote. I have not requested them to vote in any particular fashion - they are free to vote what way they want. If I have done anything wrong then please cite the relevant rule or proceedure. Djegan 08:49, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • You may not have requested them to vote in a certain way. However, I think that Henrygb has quite a point here. All (or a majority) of editors contacted were from southern Ireland (I assume this from looking at their user pages). This has distorted the geographical variety of opinion on this issue (The Republic of Ireland is known to exclusively use the term "Derry" and usually to have a mild nationalist bias). This is a problem I feel with many Irish/Northern Irish articles on wikipedia. In future if you are going to contact members for a vote, it would be wiser to contact members from a wider variety of geographical regions and political viewpoints.Jonto 00:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (i.e. Continue with the compromise -- keep this article at Derry and the county at County Londonderry, as suggested above). It's not as if either existing article is attempting to deny the existence of alternative names, and each surely already includes enough caveats without our needing to resort to "double-headed" article names. -- Picapica 18:18, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This is an incredibly troublesome issue, but it seems to me that the best might be an article on the chartered city called "Londonderry," and an article on the council area called "Derry City Council" or whatever. The logic behind the current city/county compromise is that the county is "officially" called Londonderry, and the city "officially" Derry. But this is not true. The Council Area is the only thing which is "officially" called Derry, and I don't see why the incorporated city ought to be treated differently from the county. That being said, the current compromise has worked for a long time, and I'd rather not rock the boat on something so controversial. I certainly oppose a move to Londonderry/Derry, which is noxious. john k 18:35, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep stick with the current compromise - city article at Derry, but County Londonderry. -- Lochaber 09:24, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep under current name. Compromise is not a name in widespread use. Warofdreams 13:34, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The stroke form is only useful as a redirect to the dispute article, as per Stroke City. To use "Derry" for the city and "County Londonderry" for the county is the fairest compromise. It's known as "equality of misery"! --Red King 14:41, 25 July 2005 (UTC)--Kiand 18:08, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I think I remember advocating Derry, and County Londonderry ages ago. It seems a reasonable compromise. The articles have to be somewhere, and Derry/Londonderry still could be taken by loyalists as giving 'Derry' priority. I'm not sure if the council area and the City cover different areas, although clearly the urban area (and possibly small-c city) is much smaller. Does the Lord-Lieutenant for the City cover the entire council area or just the old county borough? Morwen - Talk 14:54, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • The council area and city should be all in the same area (certainly the "City of Londonderry" does not exist as an administrative area distinct from "Derry City Council"). A very quick google leads me to believe that county and county boroughs form the basis for the Lord-Lieutenant and these should be the pre 1973 (district council) reforms - thus a Lord-Lieutentant for each of the cities of Belfast and Londonderry and the six counties of Northern Ireland. Djegan 17:39, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is an emminently reasonable compromise. Personally, it wasn't till I was almost grown up that I knew Derry had a second name - until then I had always assumed the tune was in fact the 'London derriere', and thought it must be to do with how the accompanying dance went!Blorgina 16:27, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Extremely Strong Keep at Derry. --Kiand 18:08, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep status quo. --Gabriel Beecham/Kwekubo 02:07, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • The vote is closed. The petition to move was lost. See article history --Red King 08:50, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

City of Derry

The name City of Derry strikes me as being a non-existent entity. It is the authority that holds the City Charter, which is Derry City Council making the district around the old walled city the City of Londonderry. Anything named Derry cannot be a city because it does not own a city charter. In it's current form this article is incorrect. Most people in Rochester still consider it a city but that doesn't change the reality that it isn't. It doesn't matter what popular opinion is in the city. They probably all want to stop paying taxes but it doesn't change the law. While you can call the article whatever you want the city name remains legally Londonderry. josh 03:39, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What can you do? Its is the most commonly used term for the city. Used by half the population of Northern Ireland and a majority of the people from the city. :: Keith :: 18:35, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can start with no allowing popular opinion take priority over fact. Calling it City of Derry is equivalent to calling the council Londonderry City Council. I'm not concerned about what name is seen to be premoted although I prefer Derry over the hijacked version. The problem is that using the term City of Derry is unencyclopidic and condones the POV of the nationalists. Using City of Londonderry doesn't condone the unionist POV it is just the current status that coincides with it. josh 22:03, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The article only says "City of Derry" when talking about the airport and the rugby club. This is deliberate. --Henrygb 23:05, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox is titled City of Derry. The sentence The name of the city is specified by its Royal Charter as Londonderry, and many unionists continue to call it Londonderry. also implies that the name Londonderry has been repealed by the councils decision to call itself Derry City Council. The article seems to purposely avoid the fact that the offical name of the city is Londonderry. By all means use Derry but it has to be made clear that while Derry is the popular name, Londonderry is the official one. josh 00:22, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't spotted the infobox, so I have changed it (similarly that for County Londonderry). I think The name of the city is specified by its Royal Charter as Londonderry is clear enough as to the legal position of the chartered city. And the photo of the walls could perhaps say Londonderry in the caption. But the article title is fixed by the compromise above. --Henrygb 17:01, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That seems fair enough now. One point, the city walls no longer designate the official city. The council has the city charter so the city is the district that the council controls (see Leeds and City of Leeds to see stupid it gets). You can call the area within the city walls anything you want, including the old city of Derry as belive that is what it use to be. josh 17:13, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Even then you need to be careful: the city is said (by the council and the article) to be Northern Ireland's second largest city; this depends on looking just at the primary urban area since the district has a smaller population than than the district of Lisburn City Council. The walled city was sometimes called "Derry" as in the siege or the Apprentice Boys, but it was built across the river from the previous Derry, and was (I think) officially Londonderry from its construction. --Henrygb 22:39, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


I think I got bit confused there. I thought they were just built around it. As for the old district/urban area chestnut I know all about that living in a metopoliton borough. The government successfully cocked up all decent definitions of city/town boundries during the 70s.

Shouldn't we go with the official name?

It is my understanding that the official name of the city is Londonderry. All nationalist and unionist preference aside, should we not be naming the article to fit the official name? A little web research informs me of the following:

  • According to this Google Map of Northern Ireland, it's called Londonderry.
  • Derryvisitor.com, which names the city as Derry City, admits in its FAQ here that Londonderry is the official name. "The name was originally Derry but was changed to Londonderry during the Plantation of Ulster, as the new city was built by London guilds. Both the city and county are called Derry/Londonderry, with Derry being used in some formats and Londonderry in others." Another entry in the same FAQ expands on this. "The official name of the town is Londonderry and that is why it is called Londonderry on the maps. Locally it is referred to as Derry and the City Council is also called Derry City Council. The name Londonderry was granted under a charter issued by James 1 of England in 1613 as part of the Plantation of Ulster. Under the Charter the Guilds of London were granted the area previously call Derry and therefore the change in name."
  • A BBC news article refers to the city as Londonderry.
  • According to the Derry City Council's webpage, the city's council is referred to as Derry City Council. However, this is not the same thing as the city having the official name of Derry. Certainly it is called Derry in addition to Londonderry, and with a nationalist population majority I'm sure the council themselves prefers the name Derry. However, they have not officially renamed their city or their county - at least not yet.

While I am sure that a significant number of people (perhaps even a majority) refer to the city as Derry, the official name of the city remains Londonderry. Wikipedia might cover video games,TV series and websites, but it is still an encyclopaedia, and is relied upon for factual information by a great many people. The name of the article must reflect the official status of things. --Jonathan Drain 01:31, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[6][reply]

Generally, Wikipedia doesn't following official names slavishly. You might find Wikipedia:Naming conventions interesting reading. For example, note that the articles East Timor and Rhode Island are at those places rather than the full name, and Kiev has remained at that spelling despite the instience of quite a lot of Ukranians who are demanding we re-spell it Kyiv.
Whichever it is at people are going to be upset, so the approach we have to take is to say 'it doesn't matter where it is at', and then just pick one. I think it would a more productive use of time for anyone arguing about the name, for them to expand the article, which is not actually very good. Morwen - Talk 01:35, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There currently are no naming conventions for city names, nor any relevant [conventions for Northern Ireland]. You've picked a bad example with Kiev since in this case it's primarily the locals who insist on Derry despite a more official designation.
If people are going to be upset either way, arbitrarily choosing one is not the correct option - Wikipedia has a policy on neutral point of view which comes into play here. Neutrally, the city is "Londonderry, also called Derry". If we name it primarily Derry we can be accused of nationalist or Irish bias, which Wikipedia aims to avoid. If we name it primarily Londonderry, we can at least defend against claims of unionist or British bias on the grounds that Londonderry is the official name according to the current law, and we are able to cite numerous authoritative sources which back up this fact. --Jonathan Drain 15:12, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Taking the point of view of a minority, which is what calling the city "Londonderry" would be, and not the majority is undefendable bias, however. Its not going to be changed, simple as that. --Kiand 16:24, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That's a bold statement, but claiming the name Derry to be the official one is contradicting a four hundred year old Royal Charter, Encarta, Google Maps, and pretty much any reliable source with the exception of the nationalist majority of the city itself, which is hardly surprising. With respect, since I note from your user page that you're from the Republic, I can't expect you to be unbiased in this issue. --Jonathan Drain 16:45, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That last comment pretty much kills off any chance of presuming you were basing your suggestion on NPOV concerns. Obviously your concern is to push one community's political agenda. Your snide comment has just blown your attempt to change the name out of the water. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 18:41, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to know where I can buy these Wikipedia cannons which are so powerful as to simply declare opponents' arguments "blown out of the water". :) Seriously, though, I apologise if my comment came off as overly harsh. I consider myself neither unionist nor nationalist and do not aim to push either agenda, but if you suspect that I'm requesting the name change for reasons other than cold technical accuracy, you can see from my website's whois details that I live in a nationalist area. Seriously, we have like Irish street signs and all here.
I would argue that the city should be called Derry, if for no other reason than that the majority of its inhabitants, its own city council and most people in the Republic would like to see it that way. If nothing else, it would finally solve this name dispute! However, I'm a big fan of technical accuracy, and would prefer that the article go by the city's official name. --Jonathan Drain 01:44, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, when did anyone make the claim that "Derry is the official one"? Morwen - Talk 17:37, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
"...you're from the Republic, I can't expect you to be unbiased in this issue..."; I am from "the Republic" as well and I have always insisted that County Londonderry be given prominance in articles and not be rolled back to "County Derry". You can hardly claim be be neutral when you make such an across the board statement as the one you made regarding a group of people? Djegan 19:05, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for causing offence, Mr Djegan. What I meant to say was that most people in the South call it Derry, which for them has always been the official name, and as such I would expect most southerners to oppose the name Londonderry regardless of any Royal Charter. --Jonathan Drain 01:44, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I seriously oppose being called a "Southerner" when I'm from futher north than most points in Northern Ireland are. --Kiand 02:41, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For what its worth, the Council website is WWW.DERRY.GOV.UK. The FAQ doesn't even mention the alternate name. My understanding is that the Council want to get their version recognised, but Stormont refuses to do so and Whitehall won't change the status quo. So it seems that there is a nice touch of mental gymnastics to reach compromise. The legal name is Londonderry, but only the name Derry will be used. So both sides are satisfied and both sides are dissatisfied. BtW, I notice that BBC articles always manage to use both forms in every article. So far, every Wiki article does too: the petty dispute seems to be which name shall be the main article and which shall be the redirect article? The present arrangement, where we have one of each (for the city and for the county), has been seen as equally unfair and the majority of people have accepted it without too many revert wars. I trust that anyone who wants to re-open the debate has read all the relevant articles going back at least 1000 years. One needs to learn the flickers of the eye that allows people to pass each other in the street without bumping. This is one. --Red King 23:07, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just to correct you there, it's derrycity.gov.uk, not derry.gov.uk. That only means that Derry's the council's name. To be fair, though, that the council has taken the name Derry is a sure sign that not only are more people accepting the name's precedence, but that the name will sooner or later be officially recognised as such. Perhaps I should simply wait for the official name change to fit Wikipedia! --Jonathan Drain 01:44, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is guided in cases of naming disputes by most common name. The most common name used for the city is Derry. Even the Unionist community only intermittently say "Londonderry". So under Wikipedia Manual of Style rules the page has to go at Derry. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 02:12, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yet again, the "most common name" is brought up - in this case the most common name worldwide (i.e. on maps) is NOT being used. It may be the most common name within the city, but outside the city it is most certainly not. Keeping the name as "Derry" is most certainly implying a nationalist/Irish POV.Jonto 19:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan has a very valid point about other contributors being from the Republic. We must remember that Jtdirl, Kiand, Djegan, and Red King are all contributors from the Republic of Ireland and will inherently have at least an Irish bias (if not also a nationalist one). This point is again being ignored. I recall there was a vote a while ago (along with a lobbying campaign by Djegan) where a very large proportion of the voters ended up being from the Republic. jtdirl - you are very quick to assume bad faith, (something I note that you seem to do as a habit by also looking at your talk page) and seem to use the "NPOV" clause as one to back up your own POV. Perhaps this issue would be best solved by input by those from outside of Ireland.Jonto 19:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The official name is far too controversial to be used as the only name here. As mentioned, it was called "Londonderry" because it was colonised. The displaced people are now the majority in the city, and as such it is insensitive to them to just use "Londonderry". Also, the British Tory government in the 80's allowed the city council to call itself "Derry City Council". Equally, Unionists would resent it just being called Derry on wikipedia. Therefore, in the spirit of compromise call it Derry/Londonderry. Otherwise wikipedia's impartiality is under question. I would point out too that the Loyalist Apprentice Boys's official name is "Apprentice Boys of Derry", so they don't seem to mind calling it Derry sometimes. - Peter O'Connell

Image removed

I just removed (and deleted) an image of Nadine Coyle from this article. It had no copyright information, the uploader's only contributions were uploading the image and putting it in this article, and an image of Nadine Coyle licensed under CC-SA exists at the Commons. If this page's regular contributors believe that an image of Coyle belongs in this article, the free image article is http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Girl_Aloud_1.jpg . Thanks for understaning. Jkelly 20:06, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i cringe...

Is it just me because every time I think of this article I cringe at that "Derry/Londonderry" title in the info table, it is uneccessary and should simply be "Derry" as per the article title. Djegan 19:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I accept your cringe is NPOV as you have said a similar thing at Talk:County_Londonderry. I don't feel strongly about it, but I felt that D/LD and CLD/CD were quick summaries of the articles pointing out the issue to people who do not normally read blocks of text. --Henrygb 22:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This notation is widely used itrw to keep the peace. Unless you want to start yet another revert war, I advise you leave it alone. I'm afraid, in the scale of things, your aesthetic sensibilities are going to have to take a very poor second. --Red King 12:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Map of Gerrymandered Derry

Does anybody have a map of Derry city before and after gerrymandering with information on votes versus representation? Thanks.

A CAIN document has a 1965 Catholic civil rights perspective. The map on page 3 has the 3 county borough wards shaded grey (North, South and Waterside) with representation figures on page 8. (As a passing comment, the document switches regularly between "Derry" and "Londonderry".) From 1973 the new district included the city and rural areas and used STV for elections and stopped basing the local franchise on local taxpayers, and you can see the votes (but no maps) at ARK. Note that in 1973 the SDLP/nationalists/republicans combined won a majority of seats while the United Loyalists/Alliance combined won a majority of votes. --Henrygb 00:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Its "Derry" people

The majority of people min the city want to call it Derry, and the majority of people in the county want to call it County Derry. Therefore thats what they should be called.

>> That's all well and good, but an Encyclopedia has nothing to do what they think. It has everything to do with what the current state of affairs is. The city is called Londonderry, so this is what it the article should be called.

The audacity of some people to claim that an Irish city and county shuld have an English prefix is startling.

>> Not half as startling as the mental incapacity of some people to fail to realise that, like it or loathe it, the city is part of the U.K. Whether it 'should' have an English prefix is irrelevant. It does.

theres a river through the city, on the east side of the river people want to call it london derry, on the west side people want to call it derry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.201.197.61 (talk) 18:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images on the article

Does anyone agree that the images require cleanup? I don't think that a photo of centra is really necessary to the article, and the craigavon bridge photo is way too close to the bottom of the page.

Location of city in map

Just to note that the Infobox pin coords produce different results for the red dot mrking the city in the district using different skins. I cannot see what to adjust in Template:Infobox Irish Place --Henrygb 10:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name change latest

The BBC on 7th April 2006 says that the name issue is now going to a court of English Common Law and will be settled there: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4887352.stm

Sorry I dont have an account so im not logging in! Firstly thought it would be great if Wikipedia refered to the city as stroke city and made a link from both derry and Londonderry to that page. The city is still officially called Londonderry but to continue calling it that when it is resented by many people to me seams like a daft idea. I wish both communities could come together and give the city a new name and it would save a lot of bother. Lets refer to the city from now on as stroke city on wikipedia and do away with the Nationalist/Unionist bias.

do we know what the council actually did in 2003 when it 'started the process'. reading the legislation there seems to be a general power to 'change the name of the district of the council' by application to the Minster (presumably now the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland). unlike the england and wales legislation there is no supermajority requirement. there are four things here
the name of the council: this has been changed, or they are acting as if it has changed
the name of the district: this may not have been changed
the name of the chartered city: this doesn't appear to have changed
the name of the county borough: this hasn't been changed
the name of the county: this neither

if the council is officially the 'mayor, burgess and aldermen of the city of londonderry' that implies the city and the district are considered one and the same entity, so wouldn't changing the name of the district be enough? 82.35.13.34 06:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of years ago, I had correspondence with Derry City Council. I was interested in their coat of arms: specifically that a harp had been reintroduced into the centre of the cross at the top of the arms.
I was told that the arms belong to the Corporation of the City of Londonderry (officially the Mayor, Alderman and Citizens of the City of Londonderry), which is a different legal entity than the administrative Derry City Council, although it has identical membership - and thus Derry City Council are permitted to use the arms of the City of Londonderry.
Unlike in England and Wales, local government reorganisation in 1973 specifically preserved the existing county boroughs , with the charter applying to the local government district in which it was included after October 31, 1973.
the following is from the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972:
Section 132. —
(3) On and after 31st October 1973 the charter of—
(a) the corporation of each county borough...
...shall have effect in relation to the district which includes the whole or the major part of the
borough as existing immediately before that date, but subject to any order made under section 134(2)
( c ).
Section 134(2)(c) deals with the number of aldermen and freedom of the borough.
As far as I can see there is no provision for the changing of the name of a county borough/city corporation in the Act. This in contrast to the corporations of municipal boroughs, whose charters could be adopted by a new local government district. in the case of these corporations, if the name of the district was changed, the name of the borough corporation was too.
The District Council changed the name of district to Derry effective from 7th May 1984, and according to the council the legal position is that the "City of Londonderry is presently administered by Derry City Council".
When the city council applied to have the harp returned to the city arms (it appeared in the earliest depictions, but was removed in later years), the letters patent contained the following wording:

"And wheras the City of Londonderry is presently administered by Derry City Council (the name of the council having been changed by virtue of an Order made pursuant to the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972 on the eleventh day of April 1984 and effective from the Seventh day of May following) And wheras the Mayor, Aldermen and citizens of the City of Londonderry are desirous that the said Arms including the Harp may be borne with lawful authority by the said City And wheras Cathal Logue Town Clerk and Chief Executive Officer of Derry City Council hath on their behalf requested that we reconsider the premises and evidence for the use of the Arms..." (and so on). The letters patent certified the arms (with the harp) to the City of Londonderry. They are dated the Thirtieth day of April in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Three. This is interesting, as every certificate I have seen from the College of Arms was dated using the monarch's regnal year. The Queen doesn't get a mention in the document, although the Kings of Arms making the grant are members of the Royal Household.

Anyhoo, the upshot of all this is (as far as I understand it):
  • The District was renamed Derry in 1984
  • The Council was renamed Derry City Council at the same time
  • The City of Londonderry's charter extends to the entire District of Derry
  • There is no mechanism for changing the name of the city in the 1972 legislation
  • This means that the "District of Derry" and "City of Londonderry" are identical in area
  • The "Derry City Council" and "Mayor, Aldermen and Citizens of the City of Londonderry" have the same membership.

It also means we have to replace the arms image. Lozleader 16:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense, albietl a convoluted sort : the article needs to make clear that the district name changed, not just the name of the council. Also, there is still the county borough of Londonderry to consider, and its Lieutenancy : has this also been expanded to cover the entire Derry district or not? (*also ponders what Lisburn and Newry's letters patents look like : did it extend to the entire district of Lisburn? what about Newry which isn't the name of a district?) Morwen - Talk 17:33, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Convoluted is right. As far as Lisburn is concerned, The Change of District Name (Lisburn Borough) Order (Northern Ireland) 2002 [7] would infer that city status extends to the whole local government district. I have been wondering about Newry's LP as well, I will try and write to them under FOI and get the text (that's how I got the Londonderry info). Probably a similar situation to those of Stirling and Inverness, designating a particular area (the former urban district?). Lozleader 18:01, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, legislation to create new districts defined under The Local Government (Boundaries) (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 may deal with the whole issue of city and borough charters, and inter alia the name of the city. Lozleader 08:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Official Usage

The article says in official use the city is always known as Londonderry, but as a citation it provides a BBC article. Should this be removed/or at least the citation changed?

Londonderry is the official name, so I think the title of this article should be Londonderry— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.219.8.6 (talkcontribs)

Derry GAA

From WP:IMOS The naming dispute can be discussed in the articles when appropriate. Which leads me to say that Owen Roe GAC other gaa clubs and its catergory should be all named derry as the GAA is mainly a nationalist past time and as stated here nationalist prefer the usage Derry . Would anyone agree ? (Gnevin 12:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Disagree. The county is still called County Londonderry, that's just what it's called no matter whether someone being discussed is nationalist or not. However, the GAA calls the competing county Derry and that is the GAA naming convention as a name so that is fine, but the county itself, when being referred to as a geographical or political entity is County Londonderry. Ben W Bell talk 13:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So when does the naming dispute can be discussed in the articles when appropriate. come into play it seems to me the this compromise is set in stone which is very stange for wiki where most thing are flexible (Gnevin 13:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]
It's simply not appropriate for it to be discussed in every article where the county name comes up. In articles such as County Londonderry or the name dispute article then yes it is appropriate, but in most other cases it isn't appropriate to have another discussion of the issues. Ben W Bell talk 13:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

City side / Waterside

Does anyone else think we should make mention of the two main diferent area in Derry, ie the city side and Waterside? In fact we should probably have separate articles for both as well, but I think they defiently deserve a mention in this article as well.

What does everyone else think? (Derry Boi 10:21, 23 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I think we shoud mention the two areas in the article. I'm not sure about separate articles for both though. Cordless Larry 11:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I think there should be an article about the two and their differences but not two of them. Also make sure we include a bit-sized form in the main Derry article, like we do with History. Butch-cassidy 13:07, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can we move away from the name dispute and concentrate on improving the article?

The whole name dispute is all very interesting and all that, but I think we should drive to actually improve this article. I've been bold and taken the liberty of rating the article a class B (see top of page). I think now, while consensus can never be reached I'm sure, that it's time to carry on with the task of trying to make this a GA-class article. Any further suggestions? Mouse Nightshirt 00:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An excess of sections

Actually looking at the article it has an impossible number of sections, 20m major and 5 minor. Can we trim them down, is their anyone that particularily is interested in doing this? Djegan 22:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Court says name is Londonderry

The courts have said the offical name of the city is Londonderry. As this is the offical name, as well as the alternative name of Derry being said not to be the name, the article should be renamed back to its proper name of Londonderry. A reference could be made that the councils name is derry and state clearly that the offical name is Londonderry.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6297907.stm —--81.145.241.252 18:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

You can read about wikipedias move policy at WP:MOVE. Djegan 18:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We all know what the official name is. We also know what most people in the city call it. I think the current compromise is the best. It isn't ideal, but Wikipedia works by consensus and to insist on Londonderry for both city and county would result in an edit war. That wouldn't help anyone. For the record, I think the court made the right decision given that no-one really cared about the name until the council name was changed in 1984 - changing the official name now would cause further division.

I don, however, wonder whether "In official use the city is always known as Londonderry" with the link to a BBC News website. Does that account for official use. The BBC often use Derry - their rule is that the first mention of the city in a news report is LD, the rest is just D.

NotMuchToSay 20:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that while this should be mentioned in the article, that the current balance on Wikipedia should be kept. I've dreaded the reaction this was going to get on Wikipedia in starting a full scale edit war over all this when things are relatively peaceful (other than a few anons who appear quite regularly and stick their finger in). I'm for leaving them as it is. Ben W Bell talk 08:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, while I have a feeling that the position on this could flip-fop over the next couple of years from a legal stand point however the current agreement on wiki regarding the city and county works well and avoids no end of edit wars.--Vintagekits 09:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article really should be at Londonderry yes. That would be the most 'neutral' with respect to what its called.--Josquius 12:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This argument has AFAIK been made thousands of times before. So far, you've provided nothing new to convince us that the article should be called Londonderry. As others have explained, per naming policy official names have little to do with what the wikipedia article is called 203.109.240.93 13:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've provided nothing new? What on Earth are you talking about, this is the first time I've posted in here....--Josquius 12:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He means that you haven't said anything novel: everything you said has been said before, you haven't add a different perspective. --Red King 21:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note as well that the official name of Dingle, County Kerry is An Daingean but look what the article name is on Wikipedia. It doesn't have to be the official name that is used. For English speaking countries it usually is - but not always. NotMuchToSay 19:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are forgetting that this is the English wikipedia. An Daingean doesn't sound very English to me. Londonderry is the official English name of the city.
I'm not forgetting anything. The Irish government want to call Dingle An Daingean in English in a predominatly English speaking country.
Derry/Londonderry is a special case. No other Northern Irish (or Irish) city has such a disagreement amongst its people and the people at large about its name. I don't think it will work if let both be used, because there will be edit wars. I also think that if we allow this then people will argue that the "North of Ireland", "Six Counties" and "Ulster" are also allowable in referring to "Northern Ireland". The only variation to the current policy which may work is to allow the 'other' name to be used if it can be shown that the person concerned uses it primarily. Thus we could say that Nigel Dodds was born in Londonderry and that Derry GAA is responsible for GAA in County Derry. It would still not be ideal, however. NotMuchToSay 21:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This so-called "compromise" is an absolute joke. No such "compromise" exists in reality - both the city and county are nationally and internationally recognised as "Londonderry" (internationally excluding RoI with it's natural bias). Wikipedia cannot just start making things up just because Irish nationalists have the pettyness to avoid saying the word "London". "Derry" is a perfectly valid shortened form of Londonderry, just as "Carrick" is a perfectly valid shortened form of Carrickfergus and "Ards" is a perfectly valid shortened form of Newtownards. The usage of "Derry" throughout wikipedia articles certainly should not be discouraged, but to use a shortened form of the city's title (as has just been confirmed in a court of law in the juristiction) for the article's title is just completely unencyclopaedic.

A more sensible and factual compromise reflecting reality would be do to as the major media outlets do - to have both county and city at Londonderry, but to allow either term to be used throughout the encyclopaedia, with editors reverting any petty edits that are simply changing one form to the other. Palo999 15:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem cannot be solely blamed on one side. There is a naming dispute. If the people of the city were allowed to decide the name would probably be Derry. But doing so would alienate many Protestants. We cannot pretend this situation away and we cannot just call the place Londonderry as that name is disliked by many people. We have to come to some sort of compromise because Wikipedia works by consensus. Anyone reading the Derry article, however, would have no doubt about Londonderry being the city's official name. NotMuchToSay 21:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The compromise is backwards to me. The city is Londonderry. It was founded as Londonderry and has always been Londonderry. Derry was a utterly different town which over the industrial revolution gradually became a part of Londonderry like many other towns around the world. The county however I see as Derry as that is what it has always been, Londonderry was founded in Co.Derry.--82.39.147.71 17:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious, or is this a wind-up? The city is, of course, Londonderry founded from the small "Doire" settlement. Leaving the issue of what we should call the city aside, there has never been a "County Derry" although "County Londonderry" is often called that. Before County Londonderry, it was County Coleraine. NotMuchToSay 19:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree also with what people have said, Londonderry today would be nothing without London. To say it wouldn't is just being ignorant and bias. It was a smell settlement when English settlers came and built it up and it became a thriving community.

I dont really see much about natinalists tryin to revert the County Londonderry home page back to CO Coleraine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.145.241.57 (talk) 09:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

For what it's worth, the official name of a certain U.S. state is New Jersey, however, by predominate usage by the population in and around New Jersey the state is simply referred to as Jersey - BUT - the official name of the state is New Jersey and the Wikepedia article is titled as such. Then again, the U.S. didn't get all 'up in arms' over the lingering British names within their new nation. They realized they were just names. A rose, is a rose, is a rose... MapleLeaf (signed as User:Mapleleaf but actually entered by User:65.69.81.2 ((comment added by User:Ben W Bell)))
This is a very contentious and unpleasant argument and as much as I would personally prefer the article to be called 'Londonderry' as I view it as the cities true name I understand the need for the current consensus. An edit war would be unpleasant and distract people from improving the article to fighting over the name.
It’s a name, that’s all it is and there is no need to get bent out of shape over it. Unfortunately there will always be people on both sides who will be, and thus the need for a compromise. Butch-cassidy 10:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I feel the exact same (and opposite!) to Butch Cassidy. As much as I feel both the County and city should both be called Derry, as I view that as the true name of both this agreement in necessary in order that we avoid edit wars on every page where the County or city is even mentioned once. We must all bite hard and swallow on this one. --Vintagekits 12:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think Vintagekits has hit the nail on the head, this is a working compromise (a rare thing when it comes to Irish topics on Wikipedia). Unlike the county there is a historical argument for the city to be called Derry. The Official name is used in the first paragraph, as County Derry is in the county article. That's good enough for me. « Keith te» 17:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gaelic name

Why is Londonderry's official name not provided in Gaelic? Admittedly due to the political situation, it's unlikely you'd regularly hear anyone talking about Londaindoire or Doire Londain but surely it should be consistantly expressed in Irish as it is in English and Ulster-Scots? I would propose that it is included --Breadandcheese 22:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First you'd have to cite a source for it. Wikipedia can't just make words up to tidy. --Red King 20:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ulsterbus Foyle.jpg

Image:Ulsterbus Foyle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Derry GAA and organisation in general

Can some please confirm for User:Biofoundationsoflanguage that the derry/londonderry compromise does not apply to the name of Derry GAA or organisations in general . That the compromise only applies to the legal geographic regions in the north known as county Londonderry and Derry the city (Gnevin 08:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Where has this become an issue. Let me know and I'll have a look. Ben W Bell talk 12:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If it's a name then I recognise my error and unreservedly apologise. I've just displayed my complete ignorance of GAA. Ignore me. Biofoundationsoflanguage 12:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made a response on Talk:List of Gaelic Athletic Association clubs. Yes you have to be careful as the GAA references are in fact quite acceptable uses of Derry in respect to county. It can be tricky to separate them sometimes, you just have to be careful. Personally I think we should just rename the entire county to something neutral and be done with all this but what can you do. Ben W Bell talk 12:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We had this argument when some refused to accept that there is no such thing as the City of Derry County Grand Lodge.Traditional unionist 15:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And what was the result?(Gnevin 15:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]
The result is I've just gone back into the article and clarified the name of the lodge as the name rather than the location. Ben W Bell talk 15:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks for all your help Ben and Traditional. (Gnevin 15:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]
That's okay. I knew there was something I'd been intending to go back and sort out to prevent edit warring and couldn't remember what it was, but now that's it sorted. Ben W Bell talk 15:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article's name is an embarrasment to Wikipedia

Not to go into a long rant, or coming from any kind of polictical standpoint, but this is an encyclopedia. It is supposed to represent the facts. Th city's name is Londonderry, factually and legally, regardless of popular sentiment. It is named so on maps, signage and legal documents. It makes a mockery of the notion that Wikipedia is encyclopedic by pandering to politicised editors. The title should be Londonderry, and the naming dispute should be a portion of the article. Anybody who disagrees is not fit to edit this page or call themselves an editor. 84.70.196.197 23:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Very much agree. I'm sure this has been discussed at length in the past but why, oh why, is this article not named after the official name! This would be like calling Belfast's article B'fast. Really, what is going on? I do not, of course, object to the usage of Derry being reflected but surely Wikipedia deals in fact and, fact is, this city is called Londonderry.--Counter-revolutionary 18:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very much agree. Especially considering this has recently been through the courts, who found the name to be Londonderry.Traditional unionist 22:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You could of course say that Wikipedia is outside the control of the state and therefore does not consider decisions by a state as fact, but rather what a democratic consensus considers them to be. In that regard, Wikipedia might be the best encyclopaedia ever. If that may be or not, please don't just state that anyone who disagrees is not fit to edit this page, at the very least that is an argumentative logical fallacy. --Jason (talk) 02:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sorry, but anyone who believes democracy and consensus have anything to do with recording truth and reality really does have no business editing an encyclopedia. By that logic a school that teaches creationism because a majority of the parents believe it, or a madrassa preaching violent extremism due to the local tribal communities beliefs are the best schools ever. That's a logical fallacy, and it's yours, not mine. 84.70.160.104 05:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Ireland has been in existance since 1921 and Londonderry's district council has only been officially called Derry City Council since 1984. However its official Royal Charter status can only be changed by the monarch so the city is still officially called Londonderry. As Londonderry resides in the UK and its official name is Londonderry, the article should be called Londonderry. Derry City Council can retain its name on its page as thats the councils official name - not the city's. Neutrality wise how can you object to the official spelling of the city?

The only people who truely object are the large amount of Irish republicans/nationalists that are on Wikipedia. Why can't they put aside their political bias on the topic, its such clear bigotry on the matter. London was added as a prefix to derry in recognition of the London companies job in rebuilding the city after the Irish originally destroyed Derry. Yet nationalists in their anti-Britishness feel like its Britains way of imposing their authority over the city, but then why not call Armagh, Londonarmagh if thats the case etc. etc?

Secondly Londonderry was built on the west bank of the river Foyle as oppossed to the original east-bank location of Derry (which as said was destroyed by Irish), so you could say its an entirely new settlement near an older settlement that lied across the otherside of the river, so you could say this new settlement was called Londonderry from its birth and thus the name Derry is defunct.

In fact you can blame the Irish for the creation of Londonderry for if they never totally destroyed the originally settlement of Daire in the first place it would never have had to have been entirely rebuilt by the London companies. But then again maybe King James should have called the city Derrie as he originally planned. Mabuska 00:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well we don't bloody well call Mumbai Bombay or Harare Salisbury, do we! So why call Londonderry by it's (incorrect) non-legal name?! To make matters worse we, for some reason, call Krung Thep Maha Nakhon Bangkok! This article is so PoV it's hardly even amusing. --Counter-revolutionary 20:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The difference here is this is the English version of Wikipedia and Bangkok is the English for Krung Thep Maha Nakhon, which as the article states is the Thai for it. In the English speaking world Krung Thep Maha Nakhon is known as Bangkok and thus applies in English Wiki. If the Thai's had their own language Wikipedia i'm sure the article would be called Krung Thep Maha Nakhon. Londonderry is the official name of the city in the English speaking world. The article isn't called Doire which is the Gaelic for it, thats reserved for the Gaelic version of Wikipedia. And Harare is known as Harare in the English speaking world as its actual name was changed to somethnig totally different by that countries government. Just like we don't call the Democractic Republic of Congo, Zaire anymore or Zimbabwe - Southern Rhodesia, as their governments changed the name. In the UK, Londonderry has not been changed to Derry by the government. Mabuska 22:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a mountain of discussion on this already. Please go back and read the archives to find out how the present compromise (City of Derry, County of Londonderry) came about. It has all been discussed ad nauseam many times before. --Red King 22:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The compromise is faux pas and caters totally to Irish republican ideals. How can you object to the official English language name for the city? Its a joke that the unofficial politically motivated Derry push is granted precedence. As i've already stated above, Derry City only applies to the council name not the actual city. Mabuska 22:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, what the hell need is there for a compromise which totally dismisses fact. I'd like to call Mumbai Bombay and Hare Salisbury, personally, but I don't try and push this as a PoV on wikipedia as it's not fact!! --Counter-revolutionary 22:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Exactly. So what if a 'compromise' has been reached between politicised un-impartial editors? Since when should reality be the subject of compromise to protect fragile egos against the harsh truths of the world? There's a lot of people who believe the holocaust was a myth, shall we 'compromise' to them and label it fiction? So what if the roadsigns are routinely vandalised? The fact is that the roadsigns read Londonderry in the first place and are put there by the ruling official authority. An encyclopedia should never compromise. It should be a bastion of truth, not mob sentiment. Let's call Mumbai Bombay while we're at it and label creationism fact. Red King, please go back and look up the term 'encyclopedia' - it's not synonymous with mob agreement. The truth is empirical, not negotiated in a kangaroo court, especially when flying in the face of undeniable legal truths. 84.70.160.104 05:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. All it would take for this compromise to have been reached was the large republican userbase on Wikipedia, maybe mobilised by the Irish Republican WikiGroup, to amp up the vote their way. Like at this present moment those of us who have commented in this section of the talk page appear to be in consensus that the article should be called Londonderry - especially as no-one has recently come forward to defend the usage of Derry - which they know they can't as its not the de jure name of the city and they have no proof that most people call it Derry and want it called that.
In this light i challenge those in favour of Derry to provide REAL proof from unbiased impartial bipartisan sources that the majority of people in the real world want Derry called Derry. Otherwise this article should be reverted back to Londonderry, the de facto and de jure name of the city.
Like we don't call county's Laois or Offaly, King's and Queen's County anymore do we, as the southern government, where those counties lie changed those names. So the name of a city is dependant on what the state says it is and not politicised POV's.
Is there anyway we can take this to the bosses of Wikipedia? I'm sure they don't want anymore hits on their fact credability. Mabuska 21:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Some vast Irish Republican WikiGroup conspiracy! Huh? If you want to move it look at WP:MOVE, but "cut and paste" moves are not allowed. Djegan 21:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This needs moving and protecting. There's already enough distoring of history and reality due to sectarian and religious nutjobs in the world, hopefully we can protect the wiki from that. I understand you all don't like the name and that's fine, but don't force your bile down our throats please. Someone coming here for the first time would think the City was called Derry. And it's not. And for an encyclopedia to wilfully distort the facts like that is unforgiveable. Can we get an admin ruling please? Somebody? (and BTW all the red IP comments are from me although the address is different - Steven) 84.70.180.0 07:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I'm beginning to see wikipedia prefers consensus to fact. I fear this is a lost cause. --Counter-revolutionary 08:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm new to this discussion but I feel that i would like to participate. Have we actually have a formal move request? Reginmund 21:06, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is unfortunate that so much time is still being spent with arguments over these Derry City and Londonderry county articles. Wikipedia, as an international organisation have made an excellent and impartial compromise with the naming issue. DERRY is the name of the article relating to the city as the majority of Derry's inhabitants and indeed the council wish it to be named so. LONDONDERRY is the name of the county article as this is how the people have voted in the article. I know unionists may argue that the official name is Londonderry and this cannot change, however the name was made official undemocratically by the British government of the time and not by the will of the Derry/Londonderry people. If there is going to be unsolicitated edits to change these articles to agree with others POV's then these problems will never cease! --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  20:58, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What you believe to be undemocratic is neither here nor there. Is this not an encyclopedia? The name is Londonderry, that is the fact of the matter, just as it is with Rosslea, Carrickfergus, Newtownards and Draperstown.Traditional unionist 22:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have no biased POV whatsoever but I feel that the name of the city can be changed by the city whenever they want. After all, the city council are Irish aren't they? And if they decide what the name is, what is the problem? Reginmund 21:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The city council can call it's self John Hume land if it so desires, that doesn't change the name of the city. Thats a matter for the sovereign.Traditional unionist 21:24, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well if the sovereign decides on the toponym, then why shouldn't we honour that? I think there should be a line drwan between what is common and what is correct. Reginmund 21:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well said that man.Traditional unionist 22:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately there were alot of sovereigns and rulers in history who emposed their say over the majority of a people undemocratically in an area, these were also known as dictators.
--  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  22:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you can name me more than one democracy in 1613, then I'll take that remark seriously.Traditional unionist 22:58, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just because these sovereigns were supposedly cruel (I think that genocide is more serious than a toponym) doesn't mean that we should ignore something that they imposed. I'm sure a lot of people were infuriated at some certain election results, but that doesn't mean that we should dictate what should have happened. Reginmund 17:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My point Traditional Unionist, is not the lack of democracy of the time, rather the continual justification for its namesake by, as you are indirectly stating, a non-democtatic decree from a monarch that was never in the city/county! Reginmund, Sovereigns played an active part in genocide in order to build their empires, take British colonisation of Africa in the african wars of the 18th century, however this is not the article to talk about such things. As a democrat, I do not believe in an old monarchist system where you are born to rule, clearly this is undemocratic. What I AM saying is if the people of Derry City wished its name to be Londonderry I would not have a problem and would wholeheartedly accept this as a democrat, however we both know (population demographics) that Derry city has a larger nationalist population and thus is why the council voted the name change. Unfortunately from an outdated and undemocratic decree from 1613, as traditional unionist kindly pointed out, we still have this problem! --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  21:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I was a little hazy before. The point I was trying to make is that these aren't the people that make the name of the city, despite the fact that it is. Here's a snip from self-identifying names:

Bear in mind that Wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. We cannot declare what a name should be, only what it is.

Y'know, maybe the name should be Derry considering that it is the right thing to do for the residents. However, we cannot declare what a name should be just because some monarchs named it quite unfairly. We can only declare what it is and the name is Londonderry. Wikipedia didn't choose the name, the residents of the city didn't choose the name, the monarch did. We cannot prescribe what is write or wrong. We can only report it. Reginmund 23:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But the article does report that Londonderry is the charter name. You have conveniently omitted to quote the very relevant sentence from the same WP:Naming conflict that deals with precisely this problem: Wikipedia should not attempt to say which side is right or wrong. However, the fact that the Cabindans call themselves Cabindans is objectively true – both sides can agree that this does in fact happen. By contrast, the claim that the Cabindans have no moral right to that name is purely subjective. It is not a question that Wikipedia can, or should, decide. It is objectively true that the majority of the people of Derry call their city "Derry". Clearly some editors argue that they have no moral right to do so. But Wikipedia must record what is, not what you think ought to be. --Red King 19:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very true. And the city is called Londonderry, even kif you think it ought to be called Derry.Traditional unionist 11:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is the exact point that I have been trying to make. Yes, the name ought to be Derry but it isn't Derry; it is Londonderry. Wikipedia should record what is and not what it ought to be. Reginmund 02:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has kindly delt with this issue on a compromised basis by naming the county's namesake as "Londonderry" and the city's namesake as "Derry" and for an international organisation this has to be aplauded as i am sure that they have no interest in the internal politics of a small island and its argumentitive population in the north of that island. Can Unionists not compromise rather than hiding behind the officiality of an outdated degree from a non-resident king from centuries ago? It is clearly stated in the article that "Londonderry" us the chartered name for the city thus Wikipedia have given this point as fact.
--  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  20:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To me, this isn't a Unionist or Nationalist issue. That is why we shouldn't prescribe this toponym as outdated because it certainly isn't. I'm sure many Wikipedians vote based on their political views but that isn't how we should vote on the subject. Yes, there are many things that one may oppose. For instance, I oppose the Indian renaming of cities in English becaue they have the responsibility to name their cities. Kolkata is what the name is. Calcutta is what it should be. Londonderry is what the name is. Derry is what it should be. Reginmund 20:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone ready to start another move request? It appears that the previous occured two years ago. We already seem to have all the arguments out and I would be curious if anyone would like to participate. Reginmund 22:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately your previous comment highlights my point. India as a sovereign nation, should, if the people democratically wish to do so, rename their townlands to their former linguistic form. As outsiders, neither your opinion, nor mine is relevant on that matter as it is a matter for the Indian people alone. This is being tried in an area in Ireland also where Dingle is being reverted to its former pre-colonial Gaelic name An Daingean. Ultimately these examples are similar to Derry/Londonderry's as it is a colonial past that is the root cause of the naming issues. With that being said the cause is irrelevant to fixing the problem we have here at present. I will again state that I believe Wikipedia have solved this issue in the short term with the naming compromise but that if people cannot settle on compromise then we may very well need another vote on the issue which will affect every article with Derry/Londonderry in it. I for one think we should let the issue rest on compromise. --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  16:27, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are drawing comparisons that don't exist. Northern Ireland is not sovereign, and the sovereign has decided that the City and County are called Londonderry. Whatever you think it ought to be, it is Londonderry, and wikipedia needs to respect that.Traditional unionist 12:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is exactly my point. That is why I brought up India in the first place. If Northern Ireland was sovereign, they may name their city Shangri-La but they aren't. It doesn't even matter that we are "outsiders". We can still have an opinion on this subject. The compromise was settled two years ago. Consensus can change. Reginmund 13:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect Traditional Unionist (user) the current Queen of England is, as you continually state, the current sovereign though she did not issue the name Londonderry to the city. The monarchy in Britain is largly a ceremonial roll in todays terms and does not incorporate the power they once had. You are picking out aspects of my last comment here also, because i was highlighting similarities to Northern Ireland and India based on what Reginmund thought should be the case in that country even though he is not resident, i do also believe that consensus can change on both opinions for the city, and the statelet. I am well aware that Northern Ireland currently sits within the United Kingdom and I respect the unionist people, as the majority to do so. They however do not respect the wish of the majority of Derry/Londonderry in terms of their citys name. The name is Londonderry by official historical decree but referred to as Derry by the vast majority of the people of that area and indeed the people of this island, who find it silly to change something it was called by them for centuries just because a non-resident ancient monarch wished too reward his Guild's (not the city of Derry!) in trading with Derry at that time. Again I say if anyone takes issue with Wikipedia's naming comprimise on Derry/Londonderry, please request to bring this to vote however i feel, in doing so we will again look like a laughing stock as this issue will drag on and on! --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  14:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In Northern Ireland we have done away with majority rule. Further to which, most people in Newtownards call it Ards and Carrickfergus residents refer to their town as Carrick. Wikipeida does not take linguistic laziness as a reference. The name of the city, by virtue of the Royal Charter granted by the sovereign, is Londonderry. What its residents call it needs to be explained and adequately outlined, but not dictate the name of the article.Traditional unionist 14:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am disappointed and saddened Traditional Unionist (user) in how easy you can sum up the use of the name Derry as linguistic laziness. To compare it factually as simply shortform laziness is both grossly inaccurate and ignorant.
(1)Derry was anglicised from the Irish word Doire used for the area incorporating Derry City for centuries before Londonderry even came to be known to unionist citizens, thus it is not used as a lazy term for Londonderry, on the contrary it has been used longer!
(2) Newtownards and Carrickfergus were norman settlements and given names to reflect this as "new town" and "Fergus' Castle" they have always been known as these names and the short form "lazy" term as you describe it, only applies here as the "lazy term" name for the area does not predate the longform name.
Your use of royalist linguistics leaves me wondering if this has been indoctrined into you as it sounds more like a mantra, however again I take your point that an undemocratic outdated non-resident charter renamed the city. But we are getting no where with the same arguments over and over again, and thus I guess need to leave it or do a vote request. --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  14:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how it matters that the British monarchy is a figurehead. I don't think it matters either that I am not a resident, so that is not the case I though, it is the case I knew. You again state that the Unionsts should respect what the majority wants. That is not a factor in this discussion. We don't prescribe what a city's name should be, only what it is. Northern Ireland is still part of the UK and they go by their rules which state that the name of the city is Londonderry. India, however, is not. India makes their own names. Reginmund 14:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The political and constitutional status of Northern Ireland is not relevant to this topic, I find it unfortunate that Unionists fail to compromise on this issue rather than hiding behind the officiality of an ancient and undemocratic "royal" decree. Could it be argued that this issue has more to do with dominating than officiating? --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  14:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The official status doesn't matter! Nonsense. I want to call Zimbabwe Rhodesia, most people I know would want to also, anyone who knows about Zim would want to too probably, do we, no - fact is that it is Zimbabwe now, no matter how much anyone dislikes it! Same for Bombay! Why not go ahead and prevent WP recognising the very existence of Northern Ireland? It's really quite absurd to me. Fact is fact and that's all we can have. --Counter-revolutionary 21:15, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Again we have the use of a foreign example. As I do not know the history of Zimbabwe/Rhodesia, I will not comment on its lack of relevance to the Derry/Londerry situation. But what I WILL say is that if in todays society, we can dictate fact against the will of the people, then why the need for democracy?? --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  22:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're clearly confusing democracy with mob rule. Democracy in itself isn't that bad but you lot are making it sound terrible! --Counter-revolutionary 22:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the only thing clear here is the ignorance (and perhaps a misguided Unionist perception of Irish Nationalism) in your assumption of my meaning of the word majority with, for some reason, that of a mob. Is a mob not violent? Did I in any comment state the use of violence? the answer is NO so please do not insult this debate with exaggerations. Could I also point out to readers in this that some Unionist uses of fact can at times seem abit hypocritical on Wikipedia. If I take Traditional Unionist (user) for example, here you campaign for the article to be renamed Londonderry along with Counter-revolutionary (user) yet dont you both also campaign to see the use of the Ulster Banner as the flag for Northern Ireland on Wikipedia? You state it is a defacto flag, yet defacto is not fact and thus the northern ireland flag is not shown on wikipedia as it has no official status, sure it is used by the northern FA and some sporting organisationss to represent the north, same as Derry is used every day by sporting organisations (GAA, Derry City FC) and the people of Derry to represent the city/county!! Should I accuse you of double standards in this regards? --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  22:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not edit with your political affilliations. There are toponyms that I oppose using that I use anyway. I'm not trying to make history here and neither should you. Reginmund 00:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Again please state where i have written that i am trying to make history? These type of sensationalist statements only defer from the matters I have raised. I do not state political affilliations no more than you, however I have presented a differing viewpoint on matters including potential double standards on certain editors parts, and you have yet to address this, diverting instead as to why i am raising these concerns. If you wish to use fact as an argument to changing the article name to Londonderry, surely you must apply the same principles to the Northern Ireland flag issue and defer from supporting its reuse as it is factually not the flag of the area. I have raised this point earlier not to mock, but to try and perhaps show you that what is indeed fact may not be correct in the minds of people with opposing views. To simply brush aside the opinions of others based on a questionable fact does not help remedy a situation. --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  07:59, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could I also point out to readers in this that some Unionist uses of fact can at times seem abit hypocritical on Wikipedia. If I take Traditional Unionist (user) for example, here you campaign for the article to be renamed Londonderry along with Counter-revolutionary (user)

A user name or political affiliation should not be used to judge a user, no matter how biased their opinion may be.

I have raised this point earlier not to mock, but to try and perhaps show you that what is indeed fact may not be correct in the minds of people with opposing views.

This is exactly what I mean by how Wikipedia should not prescribe. Yes, it is wrong, it is silly, let them have their name if they want it to be Derry. I agree with them. However, it just isn't and Wikipedia can't make history by doing what is "right". We're not Amnesty International. We are an encyclopaedia. Reginmund 14:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing that out in terms of using a users name. I have seen this user do likewise and unfortunately followed the example. As for your second point i will quote from a particular user in a subsection below (whos username i will not disclose now that you have brought the rule on that matter to my attention) in the voting column which may support the Wikipedia usage of Derry. Their quote is :-
To paraphrase more fully, we don't do official names unless actual English usage does not yield a widely accepted English name; so WP:COMMONNAME, WP:NCGN. Prove that first, to the content of both factions here, and then we can discuss what the Council chooses to decree.
regards, --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  20:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The usage throughout English appears to be split[8][9]. 3,520,000 v. 3,380,000 (and actually more for Londonderry). That's about an 8% difference. I submit that other criteria be considered. Reginmund 22:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could you varify where you are getting these figures from? i have looked at your search and if you look at the right corner of the blue Google bar going across the top 3rd of the page you will see in actual fact that there are quote, "Results 1 - 10 of about 8,590,000 for derry" (source = Google.com search for Derry) versus quote, "Results 1 - 10 of about 7,720,000 for londonderry" (source = Google.com search for Londonderry || (Though for google.co.uk the figure is actually 7,830,000) - make sure when testing the google.com domain, that it does not revert automatically to the google.co.uk address - this is to provide an accurate result.) --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  23:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What is your point? I am getting them from Google. Reginmund 23:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that there are significantly more results for Derry than there is for Londonderry almost 1 million more to be infact. I was questionning where are you seeing your figures clearly on the search page of 3,520,000 for Londonderry versus what i see (7,720,000) and for Derry you have 3,380,000 versus what i see in Google.com (8,590,000)! My figures are taken from the blue line bar (on the google.com page) on the top right hand side 3rd of the page--  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  01:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not your results are higher, they are only about 10% let alone there is no reason to discriminate mine against yours. Take it with a grain of salt, either way it is too close to call. That is why other criteria should be considered. Reginmund 01:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
they are not my resuts, rather the results of google!! You still have not told me where your results of roughly 3.5million for both came from in Google and I would like if you could explain to me how you managed to come up with them? I have searched multiple times and they are always 8.59million for Derry and 7.72 million for Londonderry, that is a significant difference of almost 1 million thus your comments rejecting the Common name rule below are unjustified.--  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  15:53, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what "where" you want me to get them. I am getting them from Google. I have searched multiple times and the results are always 3,520,000 (Derry) v. 3,380,000 (Londonderry). The fact that I am getting 10% more for Londonderry makes your comments unjustified. Otherwise, it doesn't make Google a reliable way in determining the common name in this case. Reginmund 17:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah the infobox

Why can I see the infobox on Northern Ireland cities and towns turning into another flag issue? I've reverted back to the UK location infobox for a couple of reasons. One, regardless of the polictics Northern Ireland is part of the UK, and the UK info box information is more relevant. Two the Ireland infobox shows NI and locations on it without any part of the surrounding "other country". It simply looks weird to see NI floating in space. What I don't want is a revert war (I'm looking at least at two likely candidates here *glare*). Part of me wonders if a specific NI template might be a compromise. --Blowdart 20:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox title

The meta tag for the title is "Official name". Well, the official name in UK law (which has jurisdiction) is Londonderry. Of course the official name chosen by the Council is Derry. So it seems to me that we should have both. If the purists insist that we can't have that compromise, then the only single option is Londonderry. There is a strange symetry in having the article called Derry and the infobox title as Londonderry. It (dis)satisfies both traditions equally! --Red King 19:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason why both names can't be used in the infobox, as it also helps highlight to dispute over the name.--Padraig 20:11, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the Council have no jurisdiction over anything other than what the COUNCIL is called. They could change the name to John Hume Land if they wanted, and so long as Arlene Foster agreed to it, it would be so. That does NOT change the name of the City though.Traditional unionist 11:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
*evil* Yea, but then which should come first? *non-evil* The official name, as we all know is Londonderry, so really it should be Londonderry/Derry, rather than the other way around. --Blowdart 11:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair comment - and it balances the equality of (dis)satisfaction a little. --Red King 18:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please halt on naming and infobox debates

I am saddened now again to see that as well as the frustrating "naming issues" that have arisen within the Derry/Londonderry/Doire articles, there is now some people from Unionist backgrounds looking to UK infoboxes for towns/cities as well as the counties. While i agree in principle with further additions to infoboxes for northern and indeed southern counties, i fail to see Blowdarts issue for changing town/city infoboxes within the north. There has been no issue upto this point with northern townland and city infoboxes. I have researched Wikipedia infoboxes for UK cities such as Cambridge, Liverpool, Glasgow and Edinburgh and the only infoboxes in these cities to show any consistancy are the Scottish ones, which differ significantly from their English counterparts. In conclusion, as there is no consistant UK-wide infobox for towns/cities I am happy to keep northern town/city infoboxes as they are. This being said, I am still expecting others here to now request a different "northern" infobox from that of the Irish town/city infoboxes for no reason other that they fear similarity with our island neighbours! Lets concentrate in updating the great history and culture content of our towns and cities rather than ruin them with petty political debating!--  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  08:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only brought it up as a particular user was going through and changing them from the UK infobox, as it is right now, to the Ireland one; which removes a bunch of useful information which is applicable to a UK town. I find it funny that you're happy to keep it as is, and yet you're talking about it being an Ireland one; which it isn't right now *grin* --Blowdart | talk 06:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

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 result of the proposal was no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Generally speaking, we don't predicate titling decisions on either original names or official names. The most relevant naming convention advises us to use the most common name for the place. It has been argued that Derry is more common, and it has also been argued that Londonderry is more common, but there is no consensus that either of these is the case. Thus, there is no consensus to move the page at this time. Dekimasuよ! 04:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


DerryLondonderry — Londonderry is the official name of the city[10]Reginmund 00:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Support - As nominator. Reginmund 00:36, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. I've always known the town by its full name by the way. Húsönd 03:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Leave it alone; neither of these addresses our test on such matters: what do English speakers call the city? We don't do official names. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • There may well be a case to be made on those grounds, but this is not it; and why stir this cauldron, anyway? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please inform me which guideline says that "we don't do official names". English speakers actually do call this city by its official name. Some of them, however, don't. Reginmund 04:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • To paraphrase more fully, we don't do official names unless actual English usage does not yield a widely accepted English name; so WP:COMMONNAME, WP:NCGN. Prove that first, to the content of both factions here, and then we can discuss what the Council chooses to decree. But, on the whole, it would be better to leave all the inhabitants of the Island of Ireland to settle their grievances somewhere else, and not stir up trouble. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The two names are somewhat matched in commonality among English speakers so it is less of a common name argument (by Google test). It is less about what is common and more about whether the distressed nationalists make the name or the distressed politicians make the name. I for one think that the inhabitants should choose the name but they don't. Henceforth, Wikipedia should not prescribe, but describe. Reginmund 05:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The official name is not always the common one. Djegan 04:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - an encyclopedia should reflect fact. The common name from Mumbai is Bombay, but we don't call it that. --Counter-revolutionary 09:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Because we've just closed the door on one set of Troubles, and we don't need another. There is a very acceptable naming convention already in situ regarding the city and county names, which has been defended by both sides of the argument as long as i've been here. It will achieve precisely nothing to mess with that. MurphiaMan 15:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose the current solution works fine using Derry for the City and Londonderry for the County.--Padraig 15:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support When there is such a split in use, I think the official name should take precedence. I supported the move of Myanmar to Burma despite that not being the official name (according to their military government, anyway) because 'Burma' was far wider in its use. There certainly is a far wider use of 'Derry' than Londonderry, in my opinion, to justify the article to be called by any other name than it's official name. Certainly where I live, I hardly ever here reference to 'Derry'. Biofoundationsoflanguage 16:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The current compromise has proved itself in limiting edit-wars over the years. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I couldn't really care either way but changing the article name is a sure fire recipe for endless disruption and edit wars. Valenciano 17:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:NC(CN) --Barryob Vigeur de dessus 18:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The Wikipedia compromise reflects name usage for Derry city/Londonderry county to a rough extent, in terms of city and county population demographics. Though some may argue what is indeed fact, the same people also argue against fact when it suits their political agenda, i.e.NI Flags Issue. Thus compromising their credibility. --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  20:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Derry is used by 80% plus of the city and thus the name should reflect this. The county (even if you exclude the city) has a nationalist majority and should be called County Derry, but thats a debate for another day I suppose. Derry Boi 23:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • opposeThe status quo may have limitations, but any change could ignite a lot of unconstructive activity. Rjm at sleepers 12:56, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - If, as suggested above, the current situation is generally acceptable I can see no purpose in creating acrimony. Ben MacDui (Talk) 13:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Londonderry is the official name. If this is supposed to be an encyclopaedia Londonderry should be the name of the article, which should contain discussion of the controversy. At some point the official name may change to Derry. 217.44.221.165 17:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment do editors still have to be logged in to vote? This editor is not logged in. Djegan 17:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose - The whole naming problem is obviously political. Now considering I come from a family line with strong connections to the Orange Order you'd think I'd want it moved, but frankly the constant edit warring that would create would be destructive. I'd love to see some actual facts about usage from Derry Boi as opposed to simply stating some random percentage *grin* Yes the current naming is, to my mind, wrong, and the official name should take precedence, but what we have is a good example of the Northern Ireland compromise, both "sides" are pissed off *grin* It's interesting however, if we went for common usage, should Birmingham be moved to Brum? Of course not which, in my opinion, shows that common usage as a justification isn't acceptable. --Blowdart | talk 08:08, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I haven't seen a single argument thus far that stands up. There is one test - what is the official name according to the soverign government of the area. The only answer is Londonderry, there is no acceptable reason to name this article anything else.Traditional unionist 15:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment What does your soverign Government say is the flag of Northern Ireland?. You seem to rely on the government position when it suits your POV, yet ignore it when it dosent.--Padraig 15:53, 14 October 2007 (UTC):[reply]
  • Comment That is an entirely different situation - that flag should be used as there is no other specifically representing Northern Ireland. Here it is black and white, with no mitagating circumstances (such as a derogation being required for practical reasons)Traditional unionist 15:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This is a example of Unionist supporting editors using British rule and it laws when it suits them, and ignoring them when it dosen't. So why should the Ulster Banner be used, because it represents the glory days of Unionist Rule, those days are over, there history just like the government that the Ulster Banner represented.--Padraig 16:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please be civil and refrain from making personal attacks. This page is to discuss the naming of the article, not to bloat about Irish sovereignty. Reginmund 16:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I'm not pledging a sectarian allegiance, and fully recognise the dynamics behind dispute, but I think the article should be entitled "Londonderry". -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Moving it would be disruptive, and cause more edit warring. Derry is a common enough name, and the article mentions both names. Lurker (said · done) 18:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There is no right answer, but the current compromise is the least wrong answer. --Red King 19:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thats the best reason I've heard. It encapsulates everything nicely. MurphiaMan 19:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The cities official name for 400 years should take precedence on an 'encyclopaedic' site. Butch-cassidy 09:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The current position is a compromise, and one that has worked for many months: Derry for the city, and Londonderry for the county (incidentally, there has never been a County Derry - it was County Coleraine before County Londonderry). Each side gets an entity each, named what it wants. No, its not perfect, but imagine the edit wars if its moved... BastunBaStun not BaTsun 00:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:
  • Comment- This is something I've considered a bit in the last few months, and haven't come to any conclusion over what it should be. On one hand the city is indeed called Londonderry as dictated by the head of state (whether democratically elected or not has absolutely no bearing on anything), and officiated by a judge in a court of law, signs directing to the city are listed as Londonderry and it seems predominant usage in the state in which it resides in official and semi-official is for Londonderry. However on the other hand the usage of local residents seems to slant more towards Derry, with the council calling itself Derry City Council (though remember this is just the council not the city, there are many cases of city and borough councils being different to the city or area name). Local usage has a big impact on this. I really cannot decide. I would like to see some neutral statistics on what the usage of each version really is. It doesn't help that Londonderry appears to be widely used, but so does Derry, so it's not a clear cut decision. Also we need to ask the question, does the weight of people living outside the area have more of an influence on the decision than the locals? Should the usage of people living in a separate state (Republic of Ireland/Ireland) have a weight of bearing on this or just the usage of people in the state in which it is situated? Also how much weight should officialdom be given considering it is the government of the country and undoubtedly in English. Ben W Bell talk 11:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - I'm tempted to vote support on this, for the reasons Ben has pointed out. ie, there is no definitive proof which name is more common. Also, the Kolkata, Mumbai, and Yangon articles all use the official name, and Londonderry is undoubtedly the official name. But can you imagine how much effort it would take to implement this? Firstly changing thousands of links, and secondly reverting the inevitable mass reverts back to Derry. So as with Ben, I'm on the fence for now. Stu ’Bout ye! 15:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be happy to do all of that if you'd like! --Counter-revolutionary 16:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I will help. Reginmund 22:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - to anyone opposing the move because of the common name rule, that argument is somewhat moot. Derry and Londonderry are almost consistent on Google[11][12]. A mere 8% difference (with Londonderry actually being the more commonly used). Reginmund 22:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be ignoring the fact that the County is also called Londonderry --Barryob Vigeur de dessus 23:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be ignoring the fact that the county is also called Derry. Reginmund 23:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When I click on your links (within England), I get:
  • Results 1 - 10 of about 7,830,000 for Londonderry
  • Results 1 - 10 of about 8,570,000 for Derry
So how is Londonderry "more commonly used" - have I missed something? In any case Google is only one source of information. Djegan 23:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From my statistics, it is. However, Google tends to fluctuate depending on where someone is geographically (I'm currenty in London). The point is that the statistics are to close to call. Other criteria should be considered. Reginmund 23:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well I live about an hour south of you. Someone above has also suggested figures similar to mine. While I can understand a small percentage variation (<10%) its difficult to reconcile the "3,520,000 v. 3,380,000" (see above section[13]), i.e. about 50% reduction in figures returned by two other people and Londonderry bigger rather than smaller in two other cases. Djegan 23:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I agree that Google is only one source of statistics, however it was the source that you gave in your points in the section above and thus is one that i too have researched. I accept that there may be Google fluctuations depending on area, eg Google.co.uk and Google.ie. However on Google.co.uk Derry still returned the most results (8.75million) compared to Londonderry (7.83million) on Google.com (the default Google site) its 8.5million for derry and 7.68million for Lodonderry again more than double earlier quoted figures and again Derry comes out with more results, thus for the Google example, the Common Name Rule is valid and should not be dismissed for this article. --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  16:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am getting more for Londonderry than Derry. Thus, I would think that if the common name rule is valid, then it steers in favour of Londonderry. Either way, we cannot argue who's statistics are better. The fact that it fluctuates between 20% and you are getting 10% more for Derry while I am getting 10% less just shows that no, the common name rule is not valid in this situation. Reginmund 17:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The common name rule does not steer in a predetermined direction as you seam to believe. It is guided by the facts, i.e. the occurence of the name, in this case by a Google test. I (and someone else) have clicked on the links you provided and they give approximately twice as many returns as you quote (in the order of seven/eight million), but instead about 10% weighted in favor of "Derry" (i.e "Derry" is about 10% more common than "Londonderry"). You cannot dismiss the common rule just because it does not favor your point of view. In any case people can click on the links you provided and decide for themselves based on whats returned. Djegan 22:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from putting words into by mouth. I never dismissed it beacause it doesn't suit my point of view. I dismissed the Google test because of its ambiguous results. Specifically, between me and other editors. Nor do I believe that the common name rule steers in a predetermined direction, on the basis of whatever the hell you are insinuating. As stated by WP:NCON, there are other ways of determining the common name besides the Google test such as with international organisations, other encyclopaedias, and media outlets like NATO[14], OSCE[15] (pg. 8 paragraph 5), Google Maps[16] CBS[17], the BBC[18], The Guardian[19], The Times[20], Britannica[21], The Daily Telegraph[22], Channel 4[23]. Reginmund 23:40, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lets have a closer look (using the google function that allows you to limit a search to a particular domain "site:anywww.foo" - note folks their may be variations in what you get when you click on the links below but proportions should not vary wildly) at the websites you provided by Reginmund because one instance on a particular website is hardly significant (could be just a typographic error, or equally their could be an alternate name in document somewhere):
  • website -- Derry -- Londonderry
  • nato.int -- 1 -- 5
  • osce.org -- 0 -- 1
  • maps.google.com -- 0 -- 1
  • cbsnews.com -- 94 -- 58
  • news.bbc.co.uk -- 41,400 -- 33,300
  • guardian.co.uk -- 1,880 -- 475
  • timesonline.co.uk -- 692 -- 559
  • britannica.com -- 479 -- 1,490
  • telegraph.co.uk -- 1,340 -- 1,020
  • channel4.com -- 467 -- 162
In summary six domains in which "Derry" is used more often than "Londonderry" and four domains in which "Londonderry" is used more often than "Derry". The websites in which their is zero or one occurences are hardly statistically significant.
In absolute terms a total of 46,353 occurences of "Derry" and 37,071 occurences of "Londonderry" on the websites that you have provided. Maybe we should include a few websites in Ireland, just for good measure? Djegan 00:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Problem is those searches are also not terribly accurate for this issue either. Derry is also used in the US for some counties and townships, as is Londonderry. There is a band called Mr Derry, along with other uses of both words. Also those searches will also be picking up references to the counties as well. Also remember that news stories may well use one term more than others as there are many stories out there that discuss the issues of the naming in both county and city may well use one term more than others. Not all returns of Derry or Londonderry are actually for the city of Derry or Londonderry and this needs to be taken into account. Of course it is tricky to go through these and pick them out, but in most of the sizable returns above I noticed on the first few pages many pages that aren't appropriate to this discussion. For instance a lot of the BBC ones that hit for Derry are talking about Derry City football club (the name of the club) or Derry league GAA games. Results like this really distort figures, and I'm sure there are also similar distracting results for Londonderry as well. Ben W Bell talk 01:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you their, these are only a rough indication and no substitute for painstaking, through and unbiased analysis of results. But because the issue is raised previously it needs some balance, and comparing and contrasting rather than going unchallenged. People can ultimately make a more informed decision for themselves. Djegan 01:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lets search some Ireland based websites using the same methodology I have adopted above (because the views of Irish-based academia and media count to). I have tried to avoid very biased outlets, like ideology or political based stuff (but again these are raw and unfiltered results so caveat emptor as returned from a quick google).

In total thats 121,410 for "Derry" and 9,066 for "Londonderry" - or seven websites in which Derry is more common than Londonderry and two websites in which Londonderry is more common than Derry. Four websites based in Northern Ireland, and five websites based in the Republic of Ireland. Djegan 01:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again taking the Belfast Telegraph example, and the Derry results (I'm just taking results at random, not due to trying to prove one view or another), you list 2,160 results. If you then remove results containing "Football", "cup", "GAA" or "final" (should get most football related items) the results drop to around 280, a great deal of those results are therefore shown to have been about football. Also many (but granted not all) of the rest of the results are about proper names of organisations which would contain Derry is it's in their name but this isn't directly relevant to use of naming of the city. This is just an example of how these results all need to be broken down more and analysed a little more. They don't always give the results we are thinking they do. The Ireland based ones possibly show more accurate usage results for city names, but then again most of these have taken a deliberate political stance on which term for the city to use. It also raises the question of whether results from a different political state should be taken into consideration or not. Ben W Bell talk 01:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed except for the last point, no "political state" gets censored on wikipedia. Djegan 01:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah no you misunderstand my intention, it's not about censorship, but if we're talking names of a city in a state shouldn't that state's usage gain priority over an outside states? Ben W Bell talk 01:44, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed as a final point about sources lets remember that whilst its easy to quote results returned from a trendy online search engine (abeit not always an exact science) their are many other things that can be used to measure how common a name is. The occurence in all the books in a national library, periodicals and printed newspapers of every type, addresses in a database, interviews of personalities, entertainment, organisations, manuals of style, old ladies on street corners in conversation. In summary we should not fall down by quoting results from just one source. The internet is not the sum of human knowledge, nor the pinnacle of human society. Djegan 01:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However, the Internet is our only source (other than books which we can cite with an ISBN). Unfortunately, we cannot go to septuagenarians on our street corner and inquire on their manual of style. That would be original research. The best we can do to determine the common name is scrutinise each individual source unless we are absolutely sure that ambiguity will not persist. Reginmund 05:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Counter-revolutionary says that "Londonderry is undoubtedly the official name". However, there is no UK body that gives "official" names to settlements. There are frequently differences between the name used by the local government unit and the name used by the inhabitants - see Hull - but neither is more official than the other. There are other examples where the name used by the local government unit was at odds with usage by inhabitants - such as LCC and GLC. Certain sources carry more weight - Ordnance Survey for example - but that doesn't make it official. It is polite to use the name adopted by the people concerned, but no more than that. In this case (as with most naming disputes) there are strong political and religious issues underlying the dispute and any change to the status quo will unleash a flood of unconstructive editing. Rjm at sleepers 08:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your point on Hull is a good one - the proper name for the City is used, not the vernacular. As it should be.Traditional unionist 11:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Errr...[24] yes, it is official. FYI, "Hull" is at Kingston-upon-Hull. Reginmund 14:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The matter of the status of Londonderry is rather academic for the purposes of a move proposal. In particular, the guidelines WP:UCN WP:NCON maybe useful for reference. In summary, the official name of something is not always the name used for the article title. Djegan 14:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are vast differences between the naming issues of Derry/Londonderry and that of Hull. I have seen instances where authors in wiki are either forgeting or just erasing the fact that the term Derry (Doire) is not just a short-form of the name Londonderry but was the original name for the settlement, this is why it is still so commonly used by people not just in Derry, but throughout the world. It cannot be simply dismissed as a short-form name as it was commonly used for the area long before Londonderry. I believe the guidelines as per the guidelines WP:UCN WP:NCON should be used in relation to this article. --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  16:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As part of the banner above says, but appears to allude some editors:
Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
Djegan 17:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Londinium was the original name of London, should we change that too? We haven't actually established the status of the common name. It appears to be matched by the search engine test. However, WP:CN also reccommends to use what media outlets, other encyclopaedias, and governments use. I have already provided link to their usage, including the goverment that obviously makes the laws in Londonderry's country. That should be more than enough reason to move this page than anti-English sentiment. Reginmund 22:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously "London" is the most common name for the largest city of England - but we can hardly compare "Londinium" with "Derry" - lets be realistic, if nothing else. However if you look at the two tests I ran above, one of websites suggested by yourself and a separate set of websites determined by myself, then "Derry" is the more common in each case overall (notwithstanding the caveats discussed). The links "to their usage" you supplied are only that - isolated cases of usage, not how common one is relative to the other - correct me if I am wrong with specific cases and links you referred to previously.
If the best reason for renaming is because Londonderry is "official" then as one editor put it when opposing "Moving it would be disruptive, and cause more edit warring". Because no strong, motivating case has been articulated. No one has been able to prove that Derry is less uncommon. Regards. Djegan 22:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No one has been able to prove that it is more common. May I remind you that half of the results given by your Derry tests referred to American toponyms. The point I was trying to make with the "London" argument is that the fact that "Derry" is the original name of Londonderry has no merit here. Thus it wouldn't at Talk:London either. Reginmund 23:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have just a couple of points i would like to highlight from what i have read thus far.
  • Firstly "Londinium" IS, in part similar to Derry, if you want to take it that "Londinium" was then anglicised to the present English-language form London as the Original Irish "Doire Cholm Chille" was anglicised to the modern english-language form "Derry" however that is where the similarity ends. Londinuim never had an addition to its name as Derry had, thus you cannot take that point further to include this issue.
  • Secondly, the user whom originally brought up the Google-based search results was not complaining on the fact that they were only one-type of result when that user thought Google backed up his claim that Londonderry was shown to be more common. When it was pointed out that other users found significantly more results from the same search backing up Derry as the more common find, that user was then dismissive of the Google and internet-type searches. Now it is believed that no one can prove which is common! This argument is turning out to be a type of farse in itself. Can i also state that Derry would not be associated in the Talk:London section because Derry does not feature significantly within the history or culture of London (UK Capital) and I do not know why this, as an example was brought up. Derry has every merrit here as it is significantly the dominent term for the city and county by the majority of its inhabitants, and is known in reference to the city even by those who refuse to call it so. May i suggest now that we let this issue drop and stick to the current Wikipedia Naming Compromise for Derry (City) and Londonderry (County) as consistant reasoning and polling for change are not holding much weight. As one user in the vote section has so nicely summed it up, "There is no right answer, but the current compromise is the least wrong answer. --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  11:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That wasn't your point earlier. Your point was that Derry was the original name and so was Londinium. Regardless of how the name was changed, whether it was anglicised or an affix was added to it, yes I can take the point further. We need not live in the past.
I never said that Derry was featured in Talk:London. I said that the argument to move London to Londinium wouldn't stand simply because it was the original name and it shouldn't stand here either. Just because it is the majority used term by its inhabitans, doesn't make it correct. Big Ben is the most common term with the inhabitants of London. That doesn't make it right either. Ironically, since Derry is wrong, that isn't a proper way to "sum it up". As one Wikipedia guideline has nicely summed it up: Wikipedia cannot say what a name should be, only what it is. Reginmund 14:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes my earlier point that Derry is the original name was to counter the myth made my some on this discussion that the use of Derry is simply down to either a "laziness" in the shortening of a longer name or some kind of pet name fondly used by the inhabitants. I again see that I need to stress this point as now you strangely compare it to a kind of pet name like Big Ben is to the Westminster Clock Tower in London. You cannot make these comparisons as Big Ben was never used as the founding original name for the Clock Tower in Westminster! To say this is living in the past by calling the city a name by which a majority of people know it as is wrong. Every name of every locality in Ireland comes from a historical Gaelic name for that place. I am sure this is also true in Great Britain with your proud Saxon, Welsh, Scotish Gaelic and Cornish traditions.
Again with the Londinium example you have given, this comparison cannot be used as no significant majority of people, both in international terms and indeed inhabitants of the city of London knows the city as Londinium, nor do they wish it to be changed! To use this comparison accurately would only be correct if the people of Derry/Londonderry wished their city to be known in the Irish-language form, "Doire" which they do not.
To fully understand the issue, you need to understand the history of the city and the Derry name. By doing so you may appreciate that giving simplistic comparisons from Great Britain and India maybe both inacurate and a distortion.
Finally your quote at the end shows me (*sigh) that now we seem to be going in circles as, by using it you have dismissed the legitimate use of the Wikipedia Common Naming Rules and reverted back to the original Never, Never mindset we are used to in this part of Ireland. I only hope that people voting on this matter in the section above believe in compromise to let this issue finally settle as Londonderry for the county and Derry for the city.
Regards, --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  20:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I never said that it was a "pet name" if you please. I think that you are getting away from the point again. It doesn't matter how it was founded. It should matter what it is called now. Leave the rest to the history books. With our "proud" Saxon, Welsh, Scottish, and Cornish toponyms (although, I don't necessarily take pride in them, our languages may evolve any which way but it is up to the people that name it to decide whether to use Hwæsingatūn or Washington.
So now the argument is about the people wanting to change the name. Well, unfortunately we cannot do anyting about it. Again, Wikipedia describes, not prescribes. The "Londinium" argument was to counter the fact that what the name was when the city was founded is irrelevant.
Pardon, but what exactly are you insinuating that I am going with my supposed "never, never mindset". I'm afraid I you will have to clarify what that means. Reginmund 01:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well of course it muddles it even more when you consider the modern city of Derry/Londonderry was actually founded as Londonderry (Derry was a town on the opposite side of the river) by the London companies. Over time it grew to encompass what had originally been Derry but the modern city is based on and formed from that Londonderry not the Derry settlement. So technically you could say Londonderry was the original name for the city and it isn't Derry that has been renamed to Londonderry but incorporated into Londonderry.Ben W Bell talk 12:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, so there's more merit to the use of "Londonderry" then I thought. Reginmund 14:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, do we have ANY valid reason not to move this page?Traditional unionist 14:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
YES - you need consensus. Djegan 16:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ADMIN: PLEASE READ THIS POST BEFORE CLOSING: We seem to have a little problem here. Apparently, skimming the votes, about 6 or 7 of the opposers are opposing the move out of fears of edit wars. Well, I don't think that this is a valid excuse. What's to war about? If the page gets moved, the description of Derry will be changed to Londonderry. If someone comes along to change it to Derry, we will just revert it. If they continue because they are trying to prove a point, We block them for a couple hours. Simple as that. Besides the point. I really don't think that fear of POV crusaders is a valid excuse to keep the page. Reginmund 21:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've read everything here, but I am not basing this close on fear of edit wars. Dekimasuよ! 04:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At this point you are just showing your (severe) desparation. Few supporters can cite anything apart from the official status of the city name as reason to move. No substantial reasons or statistics on usage were supplied for backing the move, just a handful of examples of usage. Maybe it has passed you and many other supporters of the move but the official status of a name does not guarentee it will be used. Simple fact is that their is approximatly a 2:1 in favor of retaining as is. Their is no point in moving it unless a substantial reason can be proposed. You have had a week to articulate your arguement and nothing substantial has resulted, just read through your comments and that will become very apparent. Djegan 04:31, 18 October 2007 (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.