Talk:Italian submarine Scirè (1938)

Requested move to Italian submarine Scirè

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was move to correct diacritic Aervanath (talk) 05:20, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The it.wikipedia article has the grave accent, and that's also what i am finding on Google. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 16:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. Align with Italian Wikipedia. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 20:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong support Support, assuming that the Italian WP is right. ;) The sub seems referenced in English publications primarily as Scire (without any diacritic) in addition to Sciré (with the acute accent), so I recommend keeping/adding both as redirects. According to the Marina Militare website, the present-day submarine of the same name is spelled as Scirè (http://www.marina.difesa.it/sommergibili/scire.asp) — Bellhalla (talk) 13:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:UE. The nominator and "support" voters base their case on sources in the Italian language; the common name used in English sources should be used. As using a name with the wrong diacritic is confusing, the article should be at Italian submarine Scire (1938) with redirects from both the correct and incorrect diacritics. --Rogerb67 (talk) 13:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I would say that if any provision of WP:UE applies in this case, it would be WP:UE; we're not talking about a huge difference like Florence/Firenze, in which case the former is clearly the English name for the town. And your reasoning about redirects applies equally to the wrong/no diacritic spelling going to the proper spelling. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * So, , |+scir%C3%A8+|+scire+-wikipedia, , don't count? The name is used in English sources; evidence needs to be presented from English sources to support the name change. The comment about redirects was a comment, not an argument in support of a name. --Rogerb67 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If Scire is a word in English, I'll reverse my position. But the fact that some sources misspell the name doesn't mean we have to misspell it, too. (Or is there a guideline says that we must misspell a name if some sources do so?) The proper way to handle this is to (1) have redirects from common misspellings, and (2) mention that the name is sometimes misspelled without a diacritic in the lead: "The Italian submarine Scirè (sometimes also spelled Scire) was an Italian 600-Serie Adua-class submarine, which served during World War II in the Regia Marina. It was named after the northern part of Ethiopia, at the time Italian East Africa."— Bellhalla (talk) 03:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you acknowledge that there is English usage. No, there is not a guideline that says that we should misspell words; spelling is determined by usage, and English spelling is determined by English usage. As you are aware, WP:UE says we should follow English usage where it exists, and not solely from dictionaries (although these are important), but from "verifiable reliable sources". As it now seems accepted that there is English usage, we should follow it. As yet, no-one has presented any justification of Scirè based on usage in English sources. --Rogerb67 (talk) 10:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have acknowledged from my first post in this discussion that the submarine is referred to in English sources under a misspelling. My interpretation of WP:UE is for things that have a clear English word. For example, Lisbon is the English word for Lisboa, the capital of Portugal. In a case like that there is clearly an English word, Lisbon, which is why the article is there. That's English usage, as I see it. One final question for you: if you were notable and if your name were misspelled as Rajer in a source, we should put your article there? I can't buy that. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Your persistent use of the word "misspelling" to disparage a spelling you dislike does not change the fact that English spelling is determined by English usage. If I were notable (highly unlikely) and my name was spelled as you indicate in the majority of reliable English language sources, then it would be appropriate for my Wikipedia article to be there. The way to change that would be to try and influence the reliable sources that were using that form, not to try and push through a different foreign-language form. --Rogerb67 (talk) 15:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support per Bellhalla above. --Eurocopter (talk) 18:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support the correct use of diacritics where appropriate is something that should be done. By all means have redirects from non-diacritic titles, but if there is a diacritic, use it! Mjroots (talk) 20:54, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong support - per Bellhalla. Roger's arguments haven't swayed me. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  20:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.