Talk:Cambridgeport, Cambridge, Massachusetts

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: not moved. Participants felt that using a "Neighborhood, State" format would give the inaccurate impression that the neighborhoods were cities/towns in their own right. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:45, 25 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Cambridgeport, Cambridge, Massachusetts → Cambridgeport, Massachusetts – The current title is unnecessary disambiguation. It should be moved to the new title because it is unambiguous while complying with WP:USPLACE. Interstellarity (talk) 14:00, 19 July 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 16:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 19:09, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

• I was going to make some kind of a WP:CONSISTENCY argument, but what I realized was that we really need to get these neighborhoods of Cambridge sorted out. Here are the current titles of the neighborhoods of Cambridge:

• Kendall Square Keep here
• Central Square, Cambridge Move to Central Square, Massachusetts
• East Cambridge, Cambridge, Massachusetts Move to East Cambridge
• Wellington-Harrington Keep here
• Mid-Cambridge Keep here
• Riverside, Cambridge Move to Riverside, Massachusetts
• Baldwin, Cambridge, Massachusetts Move to Baldwin, Massachusetts
• West Cambridge (neighborhood) Keep here
• North Cambridge, Massachusetts Keep here
• Cambridge Highlands Keep here
• Strawberry Hill, Cambridge Move to Strawberry Hill, Massachusetts

I think changing the disambiguation to a simple , Massachusetts is reasonable in cases where there is no need for additional disambiguation per WP:USPLACE. :3 F4U (they/it) 19:58, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Oppose moving any neighborhoods to titles that makes it appear they are independent towns or cities. For AP Stylebook cities we have things like East Village, Manhattan, Back Bay, Boston, or Lincoln Park, Chicago, and for smaller cities the current form is common. Under WP:USPLACE, I believe the "populated place" in question here is Cambridge, not the neighborhood. Likewise, while Millennium Tower (San Francisco) could be considered a "populated place" under some definitions, we don't have the article at Millennium Tower, California. There are some neighborhoods in Massachusetts that use the suggested title format, but I believe those should be changed instead; their current titles are misleading and neighborhood+state formats are not likely to be WP:RECOGNIZABLE. Dekimasuよ! 02:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
• Comment I think we need a larger discussion on this as illustrated by the list given by the nom; inappropriate to decide on a move of a single instance when there is no clear consistency and there is no clear guidance at WP:USPLACE on neighborhoods (except for NYC). Some neighborhood articles seem to use the [Neighborhood], [City] format like those with main article links in List of neighborhoods of Milwaukee, but of course the issue here is the city is not the primary topic for its name, hence where the addition of the state comes in. For instance, we have Pine Hills, Albany, New York. But we also have [neighborhood, state] as proposed, e.g. Deering Center, Maine instead of Deering Center, Portland, Maine, but mostly we have no comma-separated disambiguation if it's the only/primary topic, e.g. Old Town Alexandria, Arena District, Short North, but then a mixture of formats at List of neighborhoods in San Francisco. I think this warrants a large RM or perhaos better an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names). Really, I think WP:USPLACE falls apart here and we should go back to WP:PLACEDAB and treat neighborhood names like any other topic: If the name for the neighborhood does not share its name with any other topic covered in Wikipedia, then no disambiguation is required, which would apply in a lot of cases, including in this case (i.e., would be moved to simply Cambridgeport). But it would still be a valid question as to how to handle cases where disambiguation is actually required. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
• Strong Oppose, these are neighborhoods, not cities. Schierbecker (talk) 21:31, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply