Talk:1916 Danish West Indian Islands sale referendum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comments[edit]

Why is Danish repeated at the beginning of the article title? I haven't altered this as there may be a good reason

While I do admit it looks a bit odd in this case, the naming convention for referendums on wikipedia is "Demonym type referendum, date" similar to the example for elections in Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Elections. Since the referendum was in Denmark and the topic was the Danish West Indian Islands sale, it becomes "Danish" + "Danish West Indian Islands sale" + "referendum, 1916". Hemmingsen 16:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is one of those cases where we can reasonably make an exception - this is the joy of the fact we make the rules ourselves, remember, we get to break them when it helps us :-)
After all, there was only ever one "Danish West Indian Islands sale referendum", so it's not like we need to distinguish between the Spanish DWI sale referendum and the French one... as long as we have a redirect from the full conventional title, we can put the article itself at the less clumsy one. Shimgray | talk | 18:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Shimgray and will move the article. It looks really awkward and there was no other 1916 referendum on the islands' sale that it could be confused with if the title were rendered more concisely Andrew Levine 19:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Those are valid points. There actually was another "Danish West Indian Islands sale referendum". It was on the islands and not in Denmark proper, so it could within reason be classified as the not Danish one, but it was back in 1867, so I guess the year is sufficient disambiguation. Hemmingsen 19:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication[edit]

The "Background" and "Negotiations" sections duplicate the "History" portion of the Treaty of the Danish West Indies. 108.203.78.89 (talk) 11:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like the other way around to me? That article seems to have been created mostly as a copy-paste of this one. 80.62.117.67 (talk) 16:22, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]