Talk:Victoria (state)

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: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 13:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria (Australia) → Victoria (state) – This RM requires a bit of background. This page has long been titled "Victoria (Australia)" and has gone through eight RMs, most recently with an attempt to rename to "Victoria, Australia" in 2021. That RM was closed without consensus, but with the note that there might be "Victoria (state)" might be able to gain consensus as a title.

"Victoria (state)" is a better title title for this article compared to the current "Victoria (Australia)". This lines up with how we treat other states of other countries, such as states in the US (e.g. Washington (state)). There are no other states with the name Victoria, so the proposed title is both unambiguous and clearer to readers as to the topic of the article. Elli (talk | contribs) 09:09, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Per nom. Estar8806 (talk) 21:27, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support: That seems reasonable to me. If all state pages tend to end with (state) rather than their country, then that should be the standard. The state pages of Brazil and Germany seem to do that as well as the United States. Why? I Ask (talk) 07:56, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strongest possible support per nom. - Tbf69 🛈 🗩 17:17, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Victoria is a general name that exists for locations and entities outside of Australia (e.g. Canada, Hong Kong, Mexico, etc.). "State" is insufficient as the exact difference between a state, province, county, district, municipality, etc. is not always known beforehand to readers. The term "Australia" needs to be in the title for disambiguation. So either "Victoria (Australia)" or "Victoria (Australian state)", if one wants to use the example of "Georgia (U.S. state). Walrasiad (talk) 13:58, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Walrasiad Georgia is the name for both a country and a state. The country of Georgia is also a sovereign state, which is why "U.S." is added, see this RM. Victoria is not the name of any other state (in the sense of a federated state or a sovereign state). We also don't disambiguate articles for the sake of consistency, for example Washington (state) is not called Washington (U.S. state), nor is New York (state) called New York (U.S. state even though there are plenty of other places called New York, none of which are states, just as there are no other places called Victoria that are states. Estar8806 (talk) 22:21, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Washington" (the example cited by the OP) is a uniquely American name, whereas "Georgia" is not, and so that is the controlling example here. It has nothing to do with sovereignty, but with disambiguation. The name "Victoria", like the name "Georgia", is not unique to Australia. On the contrary, there are very many "Victorias" across the former British empire, as well as outside of it. Funny enough, the word "state" is in the name of the US, but is not in the name of Australia. That Australia's sub-national units are called states rather than provinces is actually relatively obscure to ROTW. As are the sub-units of most countries, frankly. Readers could assume "Victoria (state)" is a sub-unit of the province of British Columbia, or a name for a municipality of Hong Kong, or that it refers to the Mexican state of which Victoria is the capital (or the Brazilian state for that matter). There are plenty of Victorias, and no certainty which this article happens to be referring to. The title "Victoria (state)" is unnecessarily murky. The disambiguation "Victoria (Australia)" or "(Australian state)", is helpful to readers. The consistency argument would be the "Georgia (US state)" example. Walrasiad (talk) 23:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with this argument, I think the likelihood of confusion is small. Victoria is not the name for any other state, the BC city is clearly distinguished from the state. Both the Mexican and Brazilian cities have different spellings, Vitória and Ciudad Victoria respectively, so it is very unlikely they are confused in the manner you describe. I think the assumption that readers outside the US are unfamiliar with the concept of a state is weak, and there are plenty of other non-American uses of the term state and the bracketed "(state)" like Bremen (state), São Paulo (state), Rio de Janeiro (state) and Acre (state). Gracchus250 (talk) 01:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bremen, Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro are uniquely local names, with little chance of confusion of what country they lie in. Victoria certainly isn't.

It's not about readers outside the US. Readers in the US are unaware Australian provinces are called "states". Indeed, I'd bet the most common assumption is that they're called "provinces" (like in Canada). Walrasiad (talk) 01:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think whether American readers are aware of Australia's federation or not is a particularly important consideration, regardless they're certainly familiar with the concept of a state. The examples I listed demonstrate that the bracketed state can be used solely, and the example of Acre (state) is not a local name, it shows exactly what you describe: an international city Acre in Israel that shares a name with a Brazilian state. And there doesn't seem to be any confusion there, the two terms are clear descriptors. Besides there is a very comprehensive Victoria disambiguation page that makes clear that Victoria is an Australian state. Gracchus250 (talk) 01:32, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Walrasiad English Wikipedia is not solely targeted to the U.S. There are English speakers in the U.K. Canada, New Zealand, and of course, Australia. WP:GLOBAL requires we not base articles solely on American, or European for that matter, perspective. It is about the readers outside the U.S. just as much as those within.

Also, Washington is not a uniquely American name. There's Washington, Tyne and Wear, Washington, West Sussex and Washington, Ontario. There's also several barangays of the And of course, none of these rise to the notability of American Washingtons, but many of the other places called Victoria do not rise to the level of Victoria the state, save for maybe the city in British Columbia.

And as Gracchus said, American readers will be especially familiar with the concept of a state being a federated entity within a sovereign country. Estar8806 (talk) 01:51, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Acre is a case in point, and I'd support renaming it for clarification. I am not talking about Americans only, I am talking generally ROTW. On a personal note, I was married to an Australian woman for eight years, and embarrassingly, throughout much of that time assumed Australia sub-units were called provinces, not states. And I know I am not alone there. But personal anecdotes aside, it seems to matter of clarity to general readers is paramount. And Victoria is far too common a name across the world, with many other well-known Victorias, to assume that people will know immediately which Victoria the brief title "Victoria (state)" refers to. "Victoria (Australia)" is immediately clear and unambiguous, and thus far more useful as a title. I see no gain and only cost in this change. Walrasiad (talk) 02:29, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of the bracket isn't to be descriptive, it's for disambiguation. Other Australian states don't specify in their titles that they are Australian or a state, because that level of information is provided in the article itself. The question is whether it is potentially confusing with other major articles, and really we're only talking here about Victoria, BC as most other examples are tiny towns or spelled differently. The term "state" is sufficient to distinguish between a city and a state, and is widely understood, which is why the (anecdotal) argument that Americans do not know that Australia has states is not relevant here.

It's also worth noting that the examples you said were "local names" also have disambiguation pages with many international entries, see St Paul and Bremen.

Finally, I just don't see where this confusion will arise. Titles need to be clear when users are searching for something, so when they want the city the title points to the relevant article, and same for the state. When searching for the city or one of the small towns, users will almost certainly put a geographic qualifier in like "Victoria, Canada", and if they don't and just type "Victoria" in then that is why we have the disambiguation page. Gracchus250 (talk) 03:20, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't any other states named "Victoria". Adding "Australian" to the disambiguation is therefore unnecessary. That some Americans might not know that Australia uses the term "state" instead of "province" has literally nothing to do with this. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Bremen are primary topics for those countries. Victoria isn't. I don't see why "Victoria, Canada" should get a qualifier, but "Victoria, Australia" should not.

Some Australian states tend to have rather unique names (e.g. New South Wales, Queensland, Tasmania) or have "Australia" already in their names (Western Australia, South Australia). The only ones that do not are "Northern Territory" and "Victoria", and they certainly should have disambiguators, particularly Victoria. For the same reason "Georgia (US state)" has a national disambiguator, whereas other US states do not.

I am sorry. But your arguments are very unconvincing. I still see no gain from this change, only costs. "Victoria (Australia)" is clear as day, "Victoria (state)" is less clear. And since you are proposing to change, than I'd like to know what you think is being gained here. Because I see nothing but increasing confusion rather than relieving it. And that is a disservice to Wiki readers. Walrasiad (talk) 04:28, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is Victoria (Australia), really clear as day? There is only one state anywhere called Victoria, but there are several places within Australia alone called Victoria, including the County in South Australia, the ecclesiastical Province of the same territory as the state. It’s also funny you should cite the Northern Territory as an example of a disambiguator needed, since the article title does not have one.

Second, the idea of a disambiguator being needed if there is any remotely notable place in the world sharing the same name even if it is not the same type of administrative division then surely you believe that Paris should be moved to Paris, France, considering there is several dozen other Parises. Estar8806 (talk) 05:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, French Paris is the hands-down the primary topic for Paris. Australian Victoria is not the primary topic for Victoria. Not even close. So that comparison is moot.

As to "there is only one state", well, there's many provinces, counties, municipalities and other territorial units called "Victoria" throughout the world, which may or may not be synonymous with "states". I don't expect readers to know the sub-unit designations of all countries, which is where the element of confusion arises. That Victoria is in Australia is well-known. That Victoria is a state and not a province is not. That all other countries call their "Victoria" a country or a province or a municipality rather than state is also not well-known. Which is why when names overlap across countries, we usually disambiguate with a proper name, and not by type of unit, which might be obscure. That's why we use "Jamaica, Queens" and not "Jamaica (neighborhood)". Simple, straightforward.

I do accept your point on other units within Australia, so I wouldn't object to "Victoria (Australian state)", which would be consistent with "Georgia (US state)". Walrasiad (talk) 05:36, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is very important we are factual here, there is no province called Victoria listed on the disambiguation page. And there are none that one could plausibly argue are synonymous with states, only county level or below.

A state has a clear meaning that is internationally known and understood, I find attempting to argue that this is not the case to be unconvincing. At any rate, Wikipedia naming convention disagrees with you, as "(state)" is commonly used for disambiguation without qualification.

And the reasons cities are different is simply that they have different naming conventions. As I said in my previous reply, the brackets is for disambiguation not description. Gracchus250 (talk) 07:34, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well then I suppose you wish for Washington (state) to be moved to Washington (U.S. state) and New York to New York (U.S. state) Estar8806 (talk) 14:52, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be having difficulty following my argument. Neither Washington nor New York are names found in other countries (certainly not prominently) so the national specification is unnecessary. But Georgia and Victoria are, and so a national specification is helpful. Does that make sense or are you still confused? Walrasiad (talk) 17:10, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support as proposed per consistency. What is Victoria? It's a state. So that should be the disambiguator. Red Slash 18:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support for all the reasons listed by others. Gracchus250 (talk) 22:36, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support as argued above. 〜Festucalex • talk • contribs 11:56, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support: makes more sense, inline with most U.S state articles. The articles about the states of New York and Washington are titled New York (state) and Washington (state), respectively. Although I just ask, why isn't the article about the state of Georgia titled Georgia (state) but as Georgia (U.S. state)? I get that Georgia is a country (i.e a sovereign state) but still, the article about the country is titled Georgia (country). Thiscouldbeauser (talk) 05:37, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Thiscouldbeauser: the reasoning is that sovereign states are often referred to just as states, so "Georgia (state)" is ambiguous as to which one it might refer to and would likely lead to some incorrect links being made. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per all the "support" votes. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 22:08, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article itself makes it clear that Victoria is in Australia. There is no other state named Victoria, so there should be no confusion. There are numerous other places in Australia with the name Victoria (ie, rivers, parks, townships), so it actually resolves confusion in that sense. 115.188.131.82 (talk) 04:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]