Talk:Twente goose

Requested move 10 November 2015

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus due to lack of participation really. Try again in a few months would be my suggestion. Jenks24 (talk) 11:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Twentse Landgans → Twente Landrace goose – Per WP:COMMONNAME  [Update: Trimmed unnecessary parameters from URL; should resolve error message one user got, below]  and WP:USEENGLISH. The current name is simply "Twente Landrace goose" in Dutch (well, technically the Dutch is a contraction of a longer phrase Twetse Landrasgans; the contractions would literally translate as 'Twente landgoose', but sources do not use such a phrase in English, and the Dutch no longer use a longer version). This move will also be consistent with Landrace pig, Dutch Landrace goat, Swedish Landrace pig, Danish Landrace pig, British Landrace pig, Finnish Landrace goat, Swedish Landrace goat, Danish Landrace goat, Dutch Landrace pig, Danish Landrace sheep, Danish landrace goose, etc. [That last has a lower-case "l" in "landrace" because it really is a landrace; all the rest are standardized breeds with formal names, named after the landraces from which they were developed. WP is presently capitalizing formal breed names as [if] proper nouns, and this isolated RM is not the place to revisit that decision; this is a consistency and WP:AT policy compliance move only.]  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  11:29, 10 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 09:53, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose, obviously. I this page to its current title because there is no evidence that the former name "Twente Landrace" is ever used in English; in particular, the Liste des races et variétés homologuée dans les pays EE (28.04.2013) of the Entente Européenne d’Aviculture et de Cuniculture, the international body attempting to unify breed naming for European poultry, lists names for this breed in German, Dutch, Flemish and French, but none in English. We can't just make up an English name for it if there isn't one. We have a clear policy on this, WP:NATURAL, which reads in the clearest possible terms: "Do not ... use obscure or made-up names". The link from "made-up names" is to another policy page WP:NOTNEO, which reads (in part): "Care should be taken when translating text into English that a term common in the host language does not create a neologism in English". We don't do this, because we have policies against doing it. I suggest that the proposer withdraw this. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:17, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Your "no evidence" link, which appears to simply be a copy-paste of my own search results, is . No idea what your actual intent was, and there's nothing "obviously" about it. Top result in this search  is to use of it in a breed encyclopedia using the full phrase (though capitalizing it in title case as a heading), published in English by a European rare-breeds preservation group of breeders. Here's use in the 2012 book Keeping Geese: Breeds and Management  ISBN 978-1847973368 (which doesn't capitalize it for some reason, though this seems to be a typo, as they're consistent about that style otherwise, from a quick look-over). I'm not sure what point you could be trying to make about English when citing a French document from a France-based organization on what its opinion is about how to name livestock. Its entry for this breed is incomplete, and we have no way of knowing why they assigned the Dutch name to the English column. It's just a self-published, two-author spreadsheet with no indication of sources or methodology. Key phrase from your own post: "attempting to unify breed naming for European poultry"; a would-be standard is not a standard, the existence of one standard would not preclude others (especially if one is regional), and per WP:OFFICIALNAME, WP would not be bound to use an "official standard" name, if there was one (which there's not) if it didn't suit our article titles policy.  Finally, the supposition that naturally disambiguating by appending "goose" to the breed name of a goose breed is somehow the creation of a "made up name" does not make sense (we would have no such policy otherwise), and is a misinterpretation of WP:NATURAL; consensus has consistently, overwhelmingly turned against that idea, in the long string of 2014 to early 2015 RMs on animal breed article titles. It's normal English usage. Your former ally in opposing such moves now agrees, and said it best in a January 2015 RM: "We have a[n article about the] Shetland pony, which within the pony world is commonly called a "Shetland", likewise, within the horse world, we have "Mustangs" "Arabians" "Hanoverians" and so on. Outside of the horse world, any rational person will clarify an "Arabian horse" or a "Hanoverian horse" so as to be clear where we are talking about a horse or not."   — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  10:07, 16 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Exactly. Your Google search yields no results. The results page reads
 * Your "list of uses of the term in English" is a void list. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:31, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * That's a browser problem on your end (try a search, perhaps at Yandex if you're having Google problems, for ; I see a lot of debugging discussions, some of which involve user-level Google settings, though others are server-related.) You can tell what the search terms in my evidence links were from the URL and could have tried entering them manually. Just   will actually do the trick.  "I didn't take the time to figure out why I'm not seeing your evidence" doesn't mean "no evidence". It's not a reasonable assumption that someone would put together evidence links if they actually presented nothing at all.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  13:12, 19 November 2015 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 24 January 2016

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Move to Twente goose. After over two weeks, it appears we have consensus for this option. Cúchullain t/ c 20:22, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Twentse Landgans → Twente Landrace goose (update: or → Twente goose, per source provided later) – Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:USEENGLISH. The current name is simply "Twente Landrace-goose" in Dutch (well, technically the Dutch is a contraction of a longer phrase Twetse Landrasgans; the contraction would literally translate as 'Twente landgoose', but sources do not use such a phrase in English, and the Dutch no longer use a longer version). This move will also be consistent with Landrace pig, American Landrace pig, Dutch Landrace goat, Swedish Landrace pig, Danish Landrace pig, British Landrace pig, Finnish Landrace goat, Swedish Landrace goat, Danish Landrace goat, Dutch Landrace pig, Danish Landrace sheep, Danish landrace goose, etc. [That last has a lower-case "l" in "landrace" because it really is a landrace; all the rest are standardized breeds with formal names, named after the landraces from which they were developed. WP is presently capitalizing formal breed names as [if] proper nouns, and this isolated RM is not the place to revisit that decision; this is a consistency and WP:AT policy compliance move only.] Top search result  is to use of the proposed title as the name of the breed in a breed encyclopedia using the full phrase (though capitalizing it in title case as a heading), published in English by a European rare-breeds preservation society. Here's use in the 2012 book Keeping Geese: Breeds and Management ISBN 978-1847973368 (which doesn't capitalize it for some reason, though this seems to be a typo, as they're consistent about that style otherwise, from a quick look-over). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  12:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC) PS: WP:RECOGNIZABLE is also a factor; English does not have the same grammar as Dutch, so "Twentse" is unlikely to be recognized as a reference to Twente by English speakers, some of whom may have heard of a kind of goose named for Twente (a probable reason for someone looking for this article, given the breed's obscurity, relative to the placename). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  03:16, 25 January 2016 (UTC). Updated with additional name suggestion, 07:24, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: Re-nominating per instructions of closer of last RM.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  12:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

*Support seems like a reasonable argument. You also had a good argument against the only opposer last time, not sure why the previous RM was closed rather than just resisted for more comment. see below InsertCleverPhraseHere InsertTalkHere 05:55, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The closer in question has a good track record, and I wasn't inclined to WP:MR something that I know will succeed on a second nomination anyway. At a guess, I think he figured "no one who cares is around right now, so try again later when some of them might be."  It's better for stability against later attempts to undo an RM if there were more participants in the original, thus a clearer consensus for the move in the first place.  I'm also exceptionally cautious with animal breed moves due to previous WP:DRAMA about them, and there is no hurry, so it was no big deal.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:35, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. Nom makes a convincing case with the GBooks results and the consistency/recognisability factor. There's nothing invented about the English name; it is not our fault if someone's browser does not display the results that everyone else can see. - HyperGaruda (talk) 10:27, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I even gave him a stripped-down version of the URL that would not cause that problem. :-)  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:35, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per the well-presented case that refutes the previous reason to oppose. Dicklyon (talk) 15:53, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note for closer: The above comments were placed before the Twente goose alternative was added. Pinging those !voters now, in case they prefer it:, , .  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  07:24, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose, obviously. I this page to its current title because there is essentially no evidence that the former name "Twente Landrace" is used in reliable English-language sources (one hit on Scholar, the book mentioned by the OP). In particular, the Liste des races et variétés homologuée dans les pays EE (28.04.2013) of the Entente Européenne d’Aviculture et de Cuniculture, the international body attempting to unify breed naming for European poultry, lists names for this breed in German, Dutch, Flemish and French, but none in English. It's not in the CAB Thesaurus. It's listed as "Twentse landgans" in Barbara Rischkowsky, D. Pilling (eds.) (2007). List of breeds documented in the Global Databank for Animal Genetic Resources, annex to The State of the World’s Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. ISBN 9789251057629. (page 84). It's listed as "Twentse landgans" in DAD-IS, which also gives the English name "Twente goose".


 * The one reliable source mentioned by the OP suggests that this is the same breed as the Grey Back, on which we don't have a page; I don't agree – it's reported as a breed, we should treat it as one. "Twente landrace" is probably not capitalised in that source because the author isn't treating it as a breed name.


 * We can't just make up an English name for this if there isn't an established one. We have a clear policy on this, WP:NATURAL, which reads in the clearest possible terms: "Do not ... use obscure or made-up names". The link from "made-up names" is to another policy page WP:NOTNEO, which reads (in part): "Care should be taken when translating text into English that a term common in the host language does not create a neologism in English". We don't do this, because we have policies against doing it. Unfortunately this page was at such a made-up name for a while, which may partially account for the number of web hits in non-reliable sources.


 * If, despite that policy, the page is to be moved, it should not be moved to the title proposed. There's no other "Twente Landrace" article in Wikipedia, so there's no need to disambiguate with "goose". "Twente goose" has the same number of reliable sources (one) and would be just as good a title.


 * There are about 100 of these birds. Why exactly is the title of the article about them so important? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:10, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Um, who can tell me what's wrong with "The one reliable source ... suggests [details]. I don't agree"? The OR disagreement is a non sequitur anyway: "suggests that this is the same breed as the [other breed]" does not in any way contradict "it's reported as a breed, we should treat it as one", and nothing about this RM has anything to do with whether this is a breed or not; no one here or in the sources proposed that it's something other than a breed, like a wild animal, or whatever it is that Jlan is imagining. Regardless, Jlan isn't in a position to oppose on his theory that the RS (which he concedes is an RS) is wrong. If Jlan is convinced the breed isn't important, then why is he arguing about this at such length, and why doesn't he just take this stub (which has little hope of ever being expanded) to WP:AFD on WP:N grounds (the sources that it even exists are all tertiary, after all)? If he thinks it can be kept and can be distinguished from another obscure breed, this Grey Back, he's free to write an article on the latter, with sources not OR. Would both survive AfD? I doubt it. Absent a properly sourced article on such a distinction, then WP:TRUTH and WP:NOT apply; it's not WP's job to split hairs (feathers?) about the finest alleged-but-maybe-unsourceable details of breed distinctions.  On Jlan's sources: NOTNEO doesn't apply here; it's not WP doing translation, this is WP following sources. Let's look.  DAD-IS, as he notes, distinguishes the Dutch from the English name as such. The FAO source he cites – but doesn't quote – actually notes the language of the name, e.g. "(english)" [sic], after breed names; for this breed, if one actually goes and looks, it gives "Twentse landgans (dutch)" (not "(english)"). Jlan's evidence is making my case for me. The Entente Europeéenne source is just some primary-source, two-author French spreadsheet, an internal document with no sources; we have no idea why it puts the Dutch name in the English column, but that's obviously an error; their "attempting" to draft a standard is not itself a standard. It doesn't actually even say that it's an attempt to establish a standard; that's Jlan's assertion.  We already covered all that in the previous RM, along with why Jlan's idea that "Twente Landrace goose is a made-up name" isn't tenable, and why his interpretation of WP:NATURAL is incorrect, as shown by a long series of "Landrace" breed RMs cited in both nominations (with more in the second than the first).  Repeating already-refuted arguments as if they had not been addressed already is WP:ICANTHEARYOU, and is't going to fool anyone. PS: I provided two, not "one", sources for Twente Landrace goose, and a link to more; I assume Jlan just somehow didn't hear that, either.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  07:24, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Twente goose is also acceptable (nominator modifying own RM suggestion). Preferable per WP:CONCISE. Both this and "Twente Landrace goose" are supported by sources, so either is preferable to the Dutch name, per WP:USEENGLISH; there is thus no need for WP to ever resort to using a confusing Dutch name that obscures (for English speakers) even the placename "Twente". The longer English name has more source support, but the shorter one better complies with not just with CONCISE but also WP:RECOGNIZABLE, because it reduces the likelihood that the breed will be confused with an actual landrace due to its name. It would also moot the lone objection. Either English name is acceptable, though. There are so few sources for any of these names (the total, much less those for one version versus those for another, are statistically insignificant), a WP:COMMONNAME analysis cannot be done.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  07:24, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support; per WP:Concise. but... question what is the story with the difference between Twente and Twentse? InsertCleverPhraseHere InsertTalkHere 07:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support alternative per nom. In Dutch, Twente is a noun (name of a region), while Twentse is its adjective. Kind of saying something like: "the region of Twente and its Twentean/Twentish population," although I don't think there really is an English translation of the adjective. - HyperGaruda (talk) 10:28, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Right. This grammatical feature of Dutch makes it unlikely that a native English speaker will recognize the "Twente" place name in this. We have WP:USEENGLISH for a reason. :-)   — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  01:20, 31 January 2016 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.