Talk:Macau

Giant image of Guangdong in the middle of the article
In the geography section, there is a humongous image of Guangdong with major cities surrounding Macau listed. I think this image should be removed or resized to be a lot smaller because I feel its current size is a bit distracting. LittleCuteSuit (talk)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Macau Product Exports (2019).svg

Why is the flag of macau so big on the info box?
why it's humongous. 90.240.247.173 (talk) 17:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)


 * It's a mobile site / app bug that's present on all country / territory articles. Yue 🌙 00:35, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Should this article be written in Hong Kong English?
Macao is not a English region at all. The requirement that this article should be written in Hong Kong English looks really weird (especially when China is written in American English instead of Hong Kong English). John Smith Ri (talk) 01:05, 12 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hong Kong English is more commonly used in Macau than any other variant of English, and certainly not American English. Yue 🌙 01:16, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

area of macau is inaccurate
the area of macau as stated in "Macau" is listed as 115.3km^2 (i'm not going to write the american equivalent in miles square because who cares about the imperial system). however, the area of macau listed in the article titled "List of countries and dependencies by population density", it shows 33km^2. so which one is correct??? 2406:3003:2002:2D79:AC21:87FD:5C6E:EC8D (talk) 05:44, 16 May 2024 (UTC)


 * because of the inaccuracy in the area given, it affects the calculation for the population density of macau (which is famously listed as the most dense country/dependency in the world) 2406:3003:2002:2D79:AC21:87FD:5C6E:EC8D (talk) 05:45, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As stated in the article (particularly the Geography section) and at Geography of Macau, the smaller figure is the land area while the larger figure includes water. The land area is generally what's relevant for population density. — MarkH21talk 06:33, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * oh alright got it, thanks 2406:3003:2002:2D79:AC21:87FD:5C6E:EC8D (talk) 06:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Spelling of 'Macao'
'Macao' is the official English spelling, while 'Macau' is the official Portuguese spelling. Why is the Portuguese spelling (Macau) used throughout/ as the title of the English page? Eensaam (talk) 18:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)


 * WP:COMMONNAME overrules WP:OFFICIAL. Yue 🌙 18:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Our relevant policy is WP:COMMONNAME, but a cursory Ngrams search finds the relevant datum to be closer than I'd realized. Remsense  诉  18:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I did the exact same search and was surprised too. However, the 2018 move proposal for this article failed because the crux of the movers' arguments was also WP:OFFICIAL. This is not a policy-based point, but if you make an English-language Google search of Macau or Macao, the first page will return almost exclusively Macaus. I'd reckon a lot of editors familiar or unfamiliar with the site guidelines would need a better explanation than "it's official". Yue 🌙 18:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The question could then become "how much of that is Wikipedia itself", but it seems when it's this even, we do need a clearer, more compelling majority to make a change. Remsense  诉  18:27, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If the two names are equally common, then wouldn't being official be a reasonable "tie-breaker"? This would make sense for the naturalness and consistency criteria. Being the current title isn't a reason to favor it. — MarkH21talk 20:39, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It's more that I don't trust Ngrams as the sole data for what's the COMMONNAME in a scenario like this. Remsense  诉  20:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh sure, I agree. It's one piece of evidence, but a more detailed analysis would be helpful. If they end up being similarly common in English reliable sources then I think the official name should be the title. — MarkH21talk 20:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Completely arbitrary but more specific data point I'll contribute: my personal library of China-related books has 40 using "Macau" somewhere in the text, but 73 for "Macao". Remsense  诉  14:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Where two names both might fit the common name criteria, I favor the official name. Common name is not a purely mechanistic "vote by the ngrams" criteria. In the instance of Macao/Macau there are so many overlapping linguistic questions that I don't feel particularly strongly, however.
 * I thought I might add this from Prof. Tim Simpson's (University of Macau) recent text in case it's helpful to thinking about the issue:
 * One odd challenge encountered by anyone who writes about this city is the ambiguous spelling of Macau/Macao. Both versions are widely used. A local government directive indicates that the proper spelling of the city is "Macao" in English and "Macau" in Portuguese, except for the case of the "University of Macau" which retains the "u" in both languages. HGowever, as the latter clause in that sentence makes clear, this is primarily a policy of convenience rather than a definitive orthographical rule. In any event, I have chosen to spell Macau with a "u," which is (despite the local policy) arguably the more common form found today in the international English press. [Simpson goes on to say he retains "Macao" when quoting that usage]. Ultimately, there is no way to avoid this spelling inconsistency, which, although frustrating, is also a reflection of the endemic historical and cultural ambiguity that makes the city so fascinating.  JArthur1984 (talk) 21:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 24 June 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: no consensus. Out of the number of voters, there is a total of eight support !votes (including two weak support), and nine oppose !votes (including one weak oppose). There was no consensus since between the two sides, the two names remians the WP:COMMONNAME. While there is a proposal of official name because of interchangeability of both titles, was already tackled by arguments saying that WP:COMMONNAME supersedes WP:OFFICIAL, which was mostly the conclusion of the support voters. Since both are recognizable in English, and used widely in certain particular areas, I see no argument of move and do not move. (non-admin closure) Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Macau → Macao – Per the preliminary discussions above, it seems there's actually a solid case on WP:COMMONNAME (+ WP:OFFICIAL) grounds for this rename. Let's see where it goes. Remsense 诉  14:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Polyamorph (talk) 17:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Politics, WikiProject Geography, WikiProject Cities, WikiProject China, and WikiProject Macau have been notified of this discussion. Remsense  诉  14:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Support: As official + common name in English. --Wengier (talk) 16:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per nominator, for reasons listed above. Paintspot Infez (talk) 20:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Google Ngram results (based on print sources only) are split between the two, as are many contemporary English-language news sources (that I took a quick look at), e.g. AP News, BBC, CBC, CNN, Fox News, The Guardian, NYT, SCMP, etc. I am unconvinced that "Macao" is more recognizable than "Macau". Yue 🌙 20:11, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support. Both variations might fit the common name criteria. In a situation where we have multiple common names to pick from, I favor the usage which has the additional benefit of being "official". JArthur1984 (talk) 20:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose as Macao does not command greater WP:RECOGNIZABILITY in English. (Interestingly, the main newspaper of record in the immediate vicinity, South China Morning Post, prefers Macau.) There is not yet a strong change rationale per WP:TITLECHANGES. - Amigao (talk) 00:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose– Ngrams are too close right now to assuredly say that Macao is more common than Macau, I say leave the status quo for now. DervotNum4 (talk) 17:14, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose It seems that Macau and Macao are both commonly-used and equally recognisable. As such, there is no good rationale to change the spelling to Macao. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Support - The official English name 'Macao' also fits common name criteria, and where both spellings are interchangeable and common I prefer the official term.
 * Eensaam (talk) 14:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Support per nom Kowal2701 (talk) 19:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose While Macao is the official name of the region in English, but we must beware that both Macao and Macau are equally recognisable name in English (with the US, Singapore, and Australia prefer the latter while China and the UK prefer the former). On the other hand, the majority of non-governmental English-language sources outside China prefer to usage of "Macau" instead of "Macao", signify that there's a popularity split between two spellings that make the page cannot be moved to one another. 103.111.100.82 (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment: Relisting to allow more time for consensus to develop Polyamorph (talk) 17:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose move. Neither is more recognizable than the other.  O.N.R.  (talk) 18:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I will note here (in response equally to several of the other oppose votes) that there are five criteria for article titles. To me, the case is predicated on "Macao" being equally recognizable, but more natural, as it reflects official use. Remsense  诉  18:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Per WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. Svartner (talk) 10:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose per Yue. Ngrams does show they're close, but the current is still ahead, so something else proving COMMONNAME is needed, not OFFICIALNAMES. Tiebreaker would make sense if there were more than two spellings or Macao was just barely ahead.  Dank Jae  18:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak support: If the two names are equally common (so WP:COMMONNAME is split between them), then the article title should be the official English name for the naturalness and consistency criteria.There is no preferential treatment for the status quo under any part of the naming guidelines, even though multiple oppose !votes given here seem to be implicitly based on such a principle.My support is only weak because there isn't a detailed analysis on the frequency of either spelling. Google Ngrams show them as being similar and English language reliable sources using both names (e.g. Associated Press uses "Macao", Reuters uses "Macau"). I'd upgrade my support with a more careful counting of sources. — MarkH21talk 22:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. Neither one of two words are more recognizable than each other. Both "Macao" and "Macau" are equally recognizable in English, with "Macau" preferred by majority of English-language media publications and government publications in the US, Australia, and Singapore, while the name "Macao" used by British, Canadian, and Chinese governmental publications, as well as some English-language media publications. 2404:8000:1037:178:6846:2832:E7EC:82C6 (talk) 10:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)


 *  Weak Support - Macao is the one of the Common name as well as the official english name as said on the article itself.
 * My support is only weak because both are being use interchangeably. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.