Talk:Po Valley

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was Speedy close - reopening of discussion already closed [1] as no consensus. Húsönd 17:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

• Po valley is more common and less astonishing than the present name. If there is consensus that it should be Po Valley, fine; but if not, I would follow WP's general preference for lower case: Po is a proper name; it's not clear that Po valley is. (The present name is astonishing in part because the English spelling is Padane, as in Cispadane Republic, Transpadane Gaul. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

• Support as nom. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Oppose. It's not a valley. Timeineurope (talk) 01:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • It's a stretch of land between two mountain ranges with a river in the middle of it; why is that not a valley? Do remember that we name articles for general readers, not for specialists. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
    • General readers would not think of something that wide as a valley. Timeineurope (talk) 16:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
      • Really? It's not significantly wider than the San Joaquin Valley, and much narrower than the Mississippi Valley. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Oppose- names are interchangeable anyways. In Italy it is common to say Po Valley (Val padana), but Padan plain (Pianura padana) is deemed more correct. "Pianura padana" is what you would typically see in Italian textbooks. Either way there is the redirect.Mariokempes (talk) 00:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • No, they are not; this name is unintelligible to mere English speakers, for whom this Wikipedia is intended. Would you move it:Londra to London, because the names are "interchangeable"? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
    • Wait a minute—in Italy it's common to say Po Valley, despite recognition that it's less "correct"? Why is this even an issue? This needs to be changed. Unschool (talk) 21:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
      • In the english speaking world I've never actually heard anybody refer to it as "Padan plain", BUT my point is that it really doesn't matter. If someone types in "Po valley" it would redirect here anyway. I still think "Padan plain" or "Po plain" is more correct, geographically speaking- but go ahead and change it if that is the consensus. Mariokempes (talk) 18:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Support I must admit, it is not somewhere I am overly familiar with, having only travelled through the area once, but certainly Po valley is the term I have always seen used to describe the area in Britain. I do however think there is something to be said for Padan Plain being less confusing than Po valley, due to the lack of the river Po within said valley (as I understand it), however it is for Wiki to follow trends, not set them. Narson (talk) 21:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Support. When I learned this as a child, I was taught Po Valley. I taught geography for many years and our texts called it either the Po Valley or Po River Valley. Simply put, to the best of my knowledge, this is what it is known, at least in the States. As to the argument that it is not a valley, that may be true. But the Caspian is not a sea and the Kalahari is not a desert. Tradition often trumps taxonomy. Unschool (talk) 21:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Support Evidence (below) shows that primary English usage is Po valley. Counter arguements are quite unpersuasive as of now. It is obviously a valley, and Italian textbooks don't have to much to do with English language conventions.Erudy (talk) 02:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Oppose I would actually prefer Po plain as more idiomatic English than ‘Padan’, and fairly widely used judging by Google Scholar’s 2,100 hits. Po valley would be a fine name for a more broadly scoped article, probably one which included the whole of the river’s drainage basin. But the article we have here concerns only the plain(s) which form the base of the Po valley. —Ian Spackman (talk) 12:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • Po plain would be an improvement on the present name, and I put this back up for wider discussion. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

• 6410 Google scholar hits for Po valley
• 16 for Padan Plain
• Even the bastard Anglo-Italian Padana Plain only gets 103 Google scholar hits.

The unreliable raw google gets similar results. 530,000 for Po valley; 22,400 for Padan Plain, examination of which suggests that the latter is primarily a carelessly over-literal translation from the Italian. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

For fun I tried Italian Google... Po valley (val padana): 115,000 for Po valley. Padan plain (Pianura padana): 212,000 for Padan plain. Mariokempes (talk) 01:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Mildly "refined" google search

• -"padan plain" "po valley" -site:wikipedia.org = 209,000
• "padan plain" -"po valley" -site:wikipedia.org = 1,560

Investigation of individual hits reveals that variations of "Padan Plain" do appear to be used occasionally in English. However, the overwhelming majority of usage is for "Po valley". Britannica, the European Space Agency, the US Army, the Italian Tourism Ministry all use Po valley. There is even an small Australian firm, called Po Valley Energy, developing oil and gas in northern Italy. The weight of evidence, in my opinion, is greatly in favor of "Po valley" as the primary name for this feature, while "Padan Plain/plain" is an occasional alternative.Erudy (talk) 02:46, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

• What would most English language travel guides refer to the region as? Unfortunately, I don't have my Italy guides with me. As this is the English Wikipedia, it would make sense to refer to the region by its most commonly used name in English. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 19:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

  The only reference I can find quickly in the Blue Guide to Northern Italy is to “the wide, open plain[…] known as the pianura padana.” So we are not alone in being unsure as to the best translation. —Ian Spackman (talk) 11:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • There's another "plain of the Po" in the same book, describing Lombardy
  • Lonely Planet's walking in Italy speaks of "the densely settled Po valley (Pianura Padana)" p.18
  • Let's Go Italy speaks of "the fertile plains of the Po River Valley". (p. 378, of Emilia-Romagna)
  • Rough Guide to Italy speaks of the "Po plain".

  It is an occupational hazard of travel guides to succumb to the local lingo, because it's what's on the street signs. If they are evenly split, English is not. I hold to my recommendation; but if we can agree on Po plain, that would be at least intelligible. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was move to Po Valley --Lox (t,c) 20:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Reopening, as above; when this discussion was cut off, there was a definite potential of consenus on Po something. While I have a preference between the possibilities, any of them would be better English than the present name.

Po valley is, to my ear, and that of other anglophones, above, idiomatic English; I will accept Po Valley, even Po plain, although I do not believe the evidence supports them. Since there are several possibilities, the most straightforward way to set this up is as an approval poll, in which everyone indicates which forms they find acceptable.

Please !vote for as many of these as you can accept; feel free to add new possibilities.

Po valley

• First choice Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Second Choice Narson (talk) 13:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Po Valley

• Second choice Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • I find "Po valley" more natural, and it implies that this is, as all of these choices are, a description, not a proper name; but the difference of capitalization is marginal. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• First Choice My first due to the use of the capitalisation accepts that this is a name people have attached to it and may not be correct in literal terms.Narson (talk) 13:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• First choice This is standard English usage. It's not appropriate for Wikipedia to try to change scholarship by establishing the name "Padan Plain". Noel S McFerran (talk) 15:55, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• First choice Jecowa (talk) 02:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC) Per WP:NC#Common names and WP:NC#Caps.Reply
  • By the way, Oxford defines a valley as "a low area of land between hills or mountains, typically with a river or stream flowing through it." This location seems to meet this description. Jecowa (talk) 02:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• First Choice, only because it's the way I was taught. More importantly, though, I must say, any of these choices employing "Po" would be better than anything using "Padan". Per Haukur below, the case for Padan has not been made—even in Italy, as someone alluded to in the prior discussion, "Po" is often used. If "plain" helps as a compromise, I think it'll be okay. Redirects from Po Valley or Po valley would still get the reader to an article that they recognize. Unschool (talk) 05:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Po plain

• Third choice, but acceptable Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Third choice Narson (talk) 13:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Second choice. I don't think the case for 'Padan' has really been made here and I don't think the case against 'plain' as more appropriate for the article as currently scoped has been made either. Haukur (talk) 23:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Po Plain

• First choice. This capitalization seems more common in a casual check. I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. Haukur (talk) 23:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Padan Plain

• 6410 Google scholar hits for Po valley
• 2100 for Po plain.
• 16 for Padan Plain

There is no question that the standard Italian is pianura Padana, although one of the comments in the last discussion is that Val Padana is also commonly used. Val and valley have slightly different implications; this is not surprising, since the terrain of Italy also differs from England, North America, or Australia. But "Po valley" is what English speakers most often use and would expect; Padan is a very rare word, and is found, if at all, in Cispadane and Transpadane (note the e). Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.