Talk:911 (emergency telephone number)

Egypt also uses 911
I live in Egypt, and calling 911 would do the emergency call as well as 112 Soviera0 (talk) 12:55, 1 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Is this on a mobile phone? GSM and successor (UMTS, LTE, etc.) mobile networks are set up to accept 112 or 911 anywhere in the world. See section 7.1 of ITU recommendation E.161.1. Justinbb (talk) 17:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

911
This is not a close run thing. The use of 911 is so prominent that we really should just move the page to 911, be damned because this is not at all the  name and we're giving it  importance pretending it is. Similarly, it is by far the most common meaning of "911" among most native English speakers and most Wikipedians. The disambig page shouldn't be parked at the main real estate.

If we keep it here at 9-1-1 only for the natural dab, we should make that clear within the article and still use 911 consistently in the running text outside of the intro sentence and Name section. — Llywelyn II   20:28, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Others have repeatedly made the same point in the archives above, apparently. — Llywelyn II   22:01, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

UK emergency number
In the UK the emergency number map is 999, not 112. The map needs to be corrected. 163.120.111.178 (talk) 22:38, 19 June 2023 (UTC)


 * 112 works quite well in the UK. — kashmīrī  TALK  12:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)


 * It might work, but it's not the number that is popularly used. That has been 999 since 1937, and the fact that 112 has be added "on top" doesn't change that. Nick Cooper (talk) 21:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 21 January 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. By numbers this is 5-3 4-4 in support of the move. Most opposers cite WP:NATURAL; however, I note that NATURAL says Using an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English reliable sources, albeit not as commonly as the preferred-but-ambiguous title, is sometimes preferred. (emphasis mine) Why exactly natural disambiguation should be preferred for this article is not discussed, which weakens the "oppose" opinions. (closed by non-admin page mover) feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 15:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Edit: Awesome Aasim should be "oppose" regarding the proposed new title, so numerically this should be 4-4. However, the difference in the strength of arguments still stands; the "oppose" arguments are generally weaker than the "support" arguments. I therefore still find consensus to move based on reasons based in policy, sources, and common sense. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

9-1-1 → 911 (emergency telephone number) – The current spelling "9-1-1" is hardly ever used and is therefore a suboptimal search term / page title for Wikipedia. I'm proposing to rename the article to 911 (emergency telephone number) that would also bring about consistency with nearly all other articles about emergency numbers:

— kashmīrī  TALK  12:19, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note that there is also 9-1-1 (Philippines) so the proposed title would be incomplete disambiguation.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 17:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Right, that would make the title 911 (North American emergency telephone number), and is that really an improvement? See WP:BROKE. 162 etc. (talk) 17:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 911 (North American emergency telephone number) and 911 (Philippines) makes sense.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 17:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That's not what is being proposed.
 * Please note that the present article is not about the US number alone – vide its lead section. Even though much information focuses on the US, ultimately the article should include the entire NANP zone and other countries where 911 is used, similar to 112 (emergency telephone number). In such a case, the Philippine article might be proposed to be merged here.
 * But for now, let's try to get the name correct. — kashmīrī  TALK  18:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The Philippine merger proposal already happened, and the consensus was not to merge.
 * As far as this requested move, oppose. 162 etc. (talk) 18:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Any reasons for opposing? — kashmīrī  TALK  19:36, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * This seems like a textbook case of WP:NATURAL, where an alternative, even if not as common, serves as the better title. I'll note that "9-1-1" is hardly ever used", as claimed in the nomination, is an exaggeration; a look at the article's sources shows a mix of "911" and "9-1-1", with Canadian sources almost always using the latter. 162 etc. (talk) 19:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support "911" or "9-1-1". Oppose having the disambiguation in the title. 911 is so prominent and associated with emergencies in the United States and the world that I think this would be the primary title for this number. The second title that "911" is probably associated with would be 9/11 (maybe). But 911 the year is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Awesome Aasim 20:23, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * and the world? To me, 911 (number), a universally recognised subject, would be the primary topic in the world. Most of the world has never heard of nor will possibly ever hear of that number's use in NANP countries. — kashmīrī  TALK  20:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I can say a few of the other numbers listed (999, 112, 000, maybe 119) are just as much of a primary topic as 911. Especially 000 because it is unlikely someone is typing that looking for information on (0, 0, 0) or even chess castling (castling is denoted as o-o or o-o-o, not 0-0 or 0-0-0). 999 was popularized by British television, 112 because 112 is used as a GSM standard. Awesome Aasim 14:34, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:21, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose We prefer natural disambiguation to parenthetical disambiguation, especially partial parenthetical disambiguation. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose as WP:NATURALDIS is preferred. cookie monster   755  03:06, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. How on earth is putting hyphens between the digits any form of natural disambiguation? How does anyone look at that and think, oh right, that's an emergency number, as opposed to 911? -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:40, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * A N.A. telephone number could be formatted as XXX-XXX-XXXX so it wouldn't be all that strange to see 9-1-1 written in the same format. cookie monster   755  01:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * And in particular AD 911 and 911 (number) are not normally written with punctuation and September 11 attacks is usually abbreviated 9/11 instead and this is the primary topic over all of the other disambiguation items. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but dashes between individual digits are not normal. It's no disambiguation at all. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:48, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak support. Could be made more concise, e.g. "911 (emergency)" would probably be sufficient.  Walrasiad (talk) 12:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support, for CONSISTENCY of the set. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If consistency is what we're looking for, then this proposed title isn't it. See Category:N11 codes. 162 etc. (talk) 05:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

162 etc., I didn't see your reply. On looking, I think that N11 codes are less important than Emergency telephone numbers. By a long way. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Besides, all the other articles on N11 codes use a hyphenated spelling that's not attested by nearly any source listed there. That spelling seems like a poor attempt to disambiguate, in violation e.g. of COMMONNAME. In my view, they should all be moved to "XXX (telephone number)". — kashmīrī  TALK  15:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)