User:Colfer2/Sandbox/temp

Bsherr, I just did some research at WP:NCGN and you may have misinterpreted the section you quote. Let's quote the full paragraph so I can get my head around it: "The standard form for municipalities and unincorporated communities in the United States is Placename, State (the "comma convention"). In general, census-designated places follow this convention and neighborhoods within cities do not, unless disambiguation is needed. Those places that need even more disambiguation include their county or parish (for example Elgin, Lancaster County, South Carolina, and Elgin, Kershaw County, South Carolina). If more than one place within the same county has the same name, specify the type of local government unit in parentheses before the comma (e.g., Poughkeepsie (city), New York, and Poughkeepsie (town), New York, but not "Poughkeepsie, New York (city)"). A small number of unincorporated communities bear two states' names due to their peculiar locations across state lines, such as Glenrio, New Mexico and Texas; Freedom, Idaho and Wyoming; and Ray, Indiana and Michigan."

A few point here:
 * So CDPs use Placename, State and neighborhoods do not. Presumably neighborhood trumps CDP, so Flushing is not Flushing, New York, where New York is the state. The same would apply whether or not Flushing were a CDP. I think everyone agrees Flushing, New York is wrong for Wikipedia, though that's what the US Postal Service uses.
 * It does not say what the convention is for neighborhoods. The conventions I found discussed in the Talk archives are all comma conventions:
 * Neighborhood (example: Haight-Ashbury)
 * Neighborhood, City (example: Watts, Los Angeles)
 * Neighborhood, City, State
 * That's also a good example of editors' preferences. Haight-Ashbury and Watts are equally famous, but the L.A. editors prefer the expansion.


 * The only cases for parentheses I found were for further disambiguation. For example, if the convention for NYC were Neighborhood, New York City, we would have Murray Hill, Manhattan and Murray Hill, Queens as Murray Hill, New York City (Manhattan) and Murray Hill, New York City (Queens) . But the NYC articles are done by borough anyway, so the further disambiguation is unneeded. Assuming neither are CDPs, BSherr's method would be Murray Hill (Manhattan) and Murray Hill (Queens) . I haven't seen any support in the WT:NCGN Talk archives for the kind of thing. It goes against what I think is the policy of first name, then disambiguate if necessary. For instance, if there were a neighborhood Murray Hill and a tavern Murray Hill, both in Queens, then we would resort to parentheses.

The relevant discussions I found in the WT:NCGNTalk archives were:

"What exactly does "neighborhoods within cities do not [follow the comma convention]" mean? Are neighborhoods not disambiguated unless necessary, or do they follow some other convention?... [answer...] Whether it should be "district, city", or "district, city, state" is debatable, but I think that "district" alone would be confusing to readers and editors... [answer...] What's confusing is that it's split, I believe fairly evenly, between "District", "District, City" and "District, City, State". Since there's no rules, there's no one way, but I personally believe it should be district + name of the city article (which may or may not contain state)..."
 * Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2010/April

"The usual practice for the United States is to use Neighbourhood, City (see Category:Neighborhoods in Boston, Massachusetts and Category:Neighborhoods in San Francisco, California..."
 * Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2010/August


 * To which I would add, Category:Neighborhoods in Queens.

"A related move discussion brought to my attention that most neighborhoods in San Francisco are named Alamo Square, San Francisco, California, and so on, although there are also Alta Plaza and Russian Hill, San Francisco. This is not consistency; it isn't disambiguation either: we have no other Alamo Square or Russian Hill, so disambiguating by San Francisco is more than enough..."
 * Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2009/September

"...there was a discussion of neighborhoods which seems to have gotten lost in the merge and which preferred [Chinatown (San Francisco)] when disambiguation was necessary... [answer...] Can we record as a convention, then, that buildings, landmarks and neighborhoods within towns/cities are normally disambiguated in the form [Name (City)]... [answer...] Only if it's true; and looking at Chinatown, I see it's Chinatown, San Francisco. I would recommend that we say that neighborhoods, landmarks, and buildings are disambiguated by town, when necessary, and that using parentheses makes clearer that the town is not a customary part of the name."

I added the bold emphasis. They were specifically discussing buildings and trying to make an analogy to neighborhoods. In my example, we would have [Murray Hill, Queens], since Queens is a customary part of the name, but the tavern, if it existed would be something like [Murray Hill (tavern), Queens].

DISCUSS THIS, MODIFY ABOVE COMMENTS: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2009/November