Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:McClain County. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:McClain County, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:McClain County in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:McClain County you have here. The definition of the word Talk:McClain County will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:McClain County, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Keep. Not a fan of us being an atlas, but we do do place names, and this is one, and not SoP (as explained by Blotto). (P.S. Why did I create it if I don't like the place-name entries much? Because it was in one of Ungoliant's word lists, and I tend to be thorough...) Equinox◑14:40, 12 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
But the names of counties should not be added in such a way. I think the info for "McClain County" would be better off moved to McClain. As said above, it's not dictionary material, and I've actually NEVER seen an entry with "county" at the end of it that wasn't in the deletion log until now. This baffles me. PseudoSkull (talk) 15:14, 12 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Then why don't we have names for every county? Do you think we should include the other tens of thousands of US counties with the name "County" at the end of them? How is that dictionaric? PseudoSkull (talk) 15:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
We don't have them because nobody has added them yet. Consensus and the place-name policy say that yes, we should have them. Personally I don't care much. Equinox◑15:36, 12 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Keep. The "County" part doesn't necessarily come after in English, so I think it's useful to include it. For instance, in Alberta, one can find the "County of Two Hills" and the "County of Vermilion" (neither of which can be shortened) but "Sturgeon County" (which can be shortened to "Sturgeon"). "County" is part of the name (at least in Canada), and it's not always predictable whether it precedes or follows the rest of the name (again, at least in Canada). Thus, it is as useful to have as "New York City," IMO. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 20:24, 12 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
I don't see why this should be included any more than tens or probably hundreds of thousands of other minor place names. Is a dictionary really the place for all these? I think they belong in Wikipedia. Mihia (talk) 10:19, 14 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
I don't see any harm in what is in most cases a one-line entry. A link can be added to Wikipedia where an article exists; Wikipedia is of course the place for an in-depth description. DonnanZ (talk) 11:17, 14 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
I think the question is less about "no harm" and more about what is the purpose of a dictionary. I do not personally think that the purpose of a dictionary is to list potentially hundreds of thousands of minor place-names. Mihia (talk) 03:48, 15 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
We recently voted on and passed a policy to include counties (see the fifth bullet of CFI#Place names), so if you oppose their inclusion, you'll have to get enough support to overturn that vote. I find etymologies of place names very interesting, so I don't see any good reason why we shouldn't include them in Wiktionay. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 05:33, 15 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Yes, place name etymologies are very interesting. Do these belong in a dictionary? I would say no. It does not bother me enough to campaign to overturn that vote, however. Mihia (talk) 03:07, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
They may not belong in a regular dictionary, but I think they are perfectly appropriate for a dictionary with unlimited space, a goal to be comprehensive, and no expenses to worry about. As long as someone wants to add them, I say go for it. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 03:23, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
What you find uninteresting may be of interest to other users; personally I am interested in place names. How places got their names can also be interesting, and etymology is included in some cases. When creating Mascot I found that the original preferred name was Ascot, but the postal authorities weren't in favour for some reason, so the name was changed. DonnanZ (talk) 12:51, 14 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
I don't know about Wyang, but my objection is solely to the listings with "County" in the name. I have no objection whatsoever to including county names under their "simple" names, such as McClain in this instance. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:08, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
I am leaning keep because from what I know (as a non-Usonian) county names in the US are always named with the word "County" included, it's a fixed part of the name. Would McClain County ever be referred to as just McClain? If someone asked which county you are from, would the answer likely be McClain or McClain County? —CodeCat22:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
@CodeCat:: If the question was "What county are you from?" I'd say "McClain", because it would be clear from the question I'm answering that I'm referring to the county. But if the question were "Where are you from?" I'd say "McClain County", because "McClain" alone would be interpreted as the name of a city or town. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:06, 16 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Angr: I don't see how they are different. Or South + Africa, New + York, etc. We just had a discussion on place names and unless I misread that somehow, all first-level subdivisions were considered legit as were cities, towns, and villages. Is that incorrect? Are second-level administrative divisions not included according to your understanding? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯20:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
Keep (oppose blanket deletion) per Andrew, and New York City: sometimes a place name includes the nature of the name (like city or county), and removing that word gives you a name that isn't what human beings use to describe the place. I think this is coming from a misguided idea about what SoP means (and I say this as a deletionist!). Equinox◑20:28, 12 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Actually, I think the title of the category is far too long, and should be shortened to say "US counties". This would make addition of the category to entries much easier. DonnanZ (talk) 09:52, 14 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Following up on what was suggested here, I created the shorter name you mention (with language prefix: CAT:en:US counties) as a redirect. Entries that get placed in the shorter-name category can be moved to the longer-name category periodically by bot or AutoWikiBrowser. :) If you use Hotcat, adding even the longer name is not hard, btw. - -sche(discuss)04:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
About placenames: note that there are placename paper dictionaries e.g. Dictionnaire des noms de lieux (Le Robert), which are purely etymological. Etymological information belongs to the Wiktionary project. Placenames should be welcome, even very minor ones (but not including placenames which cannot be considered as words, such as Excelsior Hotel or 4th Street). Another important reason to include them is demonyms. Lmaltier (talk) 07:52, 18 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Delete. These are inherently encyclopedic, as are all of the newly CFI-compliant place names. At least when the bar was at the state and primary administrative district level there wasn't the potential for hundreds of thousands of worthless entries, only hundreds. - TheDaveRoss12:51, 3 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Its contents have merely been put in subcategories. Whether or not it would be useful to double-categorize, so that Virginian counties were in both "Counties of Virginia" and this big category, I'm not sure. One day it'd be nice if the site software itself allowed users to easily get a clickable list of everything that is in the subcategories of any given category. - -sche(discuss)04:22, 17 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
