Swept in from the pub

Trump just signed an executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico to "Gulf of America". Obviously, this name change is only in force in the U.S., but should we make a note somewhere in the U.S. article that it is officially called the "Gulf of America" within the States? The dog2 (talk) 14:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

No. Per Wikivoyage:Naming conventions, we care only about what names are most used in English. Official names are of no relevance. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Some Americans will call it "Gulf of America", others will call it "Gulf of How does this Lower the Price of Eggs?". Until it catches on in the U.S. we needn't worry about it. Ground Zero (talk) 18:34, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Also no – I doubt many people will fall onto Trump's stupidity. --SHB (t | c | m) 21:26, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

No. One analogous case is Persian Gulf where we have the text:

"Persian Gulf" has been the usual term in English for centuries; this goes back at least to the Romans calling it "Sinus Persicus". It is sometimes also called the "Arabian Gulf", mainly in Arab countries.

As I see it we might at most need a similar comment on "Gulf of America" if and when that term comes into general use. As GZ says, we certainly should not worry about it yet, Pashley (talk) 22:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Haha, I had a feeling this was going to come up. I agree with everyone else. Trump is just playing politics at this point. Let's stick with solely calling it the Gulf of Mexico unless this or some other term becomes widespread. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 22:46, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Another analogous case would be the South China Sea, which Filipinos call the West Philippine Sea and Vietnamese call the East Sea. But OK, I'm happy to wait and see if "Gulf of America" actually gains traction the U.S. If it turns out that Democrats stick with "Gulf of Mexico" while Republicans adopt "Gulf of America" (which is certainly possible given the polarisation of American politics), then it becomes a more complex issue as to what to call it. The dog2 (talk) 23:51, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Absolutely not. Mrkstvns (talk) 00:28, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

As with anything political motivated, let's wait and see what status is after the midterm election. 90.233.200.244 15:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

I doubt things will suddenly change in 2026 either. --SHB (t | c | m) 02:34, 23 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Suddenly?! I don't think so either, it's either descent or ascent from here. 95.203.20.51 03:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Point being US federal midterm elections aren't likely to cause a shift in usage. --SHB (t | c | m) 03:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Point being that midterm election will be the benchmark compared to now. 95.203.20.51 03:26, 23 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Okay buddy. Whatever you say. --SHB (t | c | m) 04:55, 23 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

A similar example is Erdoğan’s edict changing Turkey into Türkiye. That makes a bit more sense as it was already in use for branding and marketing including for tourism, but “Turkey” is entrenched in common English usage, and Erdoğan can’t mandate otherwise. And Turkey has no plans to start calling its neighbours by their local-language names, which (working clockwise) are Ελλάδα, България, საქართველო, Հայաստան, Azerbaycan, العراق and سوريا. Grahamsands (talk) 15:06, 25 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

It seems we have no prescribed specific policy for which convention we use for Mexican destinations (country or first-level administrative division) – which would in theory mean that the default conventions apply – use the country name.

However, a look at PetScan will tell you this is far from reality, with the practice we use seemingly using a mix of both "(Mexico)" (e.g. La Paz (Mexico), León (Mexico), Mérida (Mexico)) and the state (Durango (Durango), Loreto (Baja California), Nogales (Sonora)). Given Mexico is a federation state similar to Australia, Canada and the United States, I personally lean towards the latter but would like to hear other opinions. //shb (t | c | m) 13:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I think we could find enough examples of places with the same name in different states to justify using the state as an identifier. How do you say "Springfield" in Mexican Spanish? e.g., Loreto Baja California Sur) and Loreto (Zacatecas), Nogales (Sonora) and Nogales (Sonora) Ground Zero (talk) 14:19, 19 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I agree with @Ground Zero, using the state gives us more flexibility when their are multiple occurrences of the same city name, as happens with places named after saints or places named after cities in Spain. Mrkstvns (talk) 14:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I'd rather see the biggest/most recognizable place used when that is sufficient, and smaller/less known places used when that is necessary. For example:

• "Springfield" exists in three places, but only once in each country: Use "Springfield (Mexico)", "Springfield (Guyana)", and "Springfield (Canada)".
• "Springfield" exists in three places, but all in the same country: Use "Springfield (Alaska)", "Springfield (California)", and "Springfield (New York)".
• "Springfield" exists in three places, twice in one country and once in another: Use "Springfield (Alaska)", "Springfield (California)", and "Springfield (Mexico)".

WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:22, 20 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I agree. Using states for places in the US is natural for people from there, but often a well-known city can be in a state or province the name of which isn't recognised by most people from overseas. Guessing at whether the León in Guanajuato, Landes or León is the one in Spain is frustrating – not everybody can be expected to know Landes of France and to recognise that Guanajuato sounds Latin American, and I assume there are quite some worse cases. But we shouldn't need to go past country level (Venus (Earth)?). –LPfi (talk) 11:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

My main issue with this is it creates an inconsistency when using the search bar, especially for federation states where geographic naming is done by local naming authorities (like in the US, Australia or Canada). Should someone searching for North Sydney (Nova Scotia) start searching "North Sydney (Canada)" or "North Sydney (Nova Scotia)"? From the reader's point of view this feels like adding an extra layer of complexity even though it is probably better from a recognisability point of view. Mexico is another federation state so at the very least I lean towards using the same naming conventions as the US. //shb (t | c | m) 11:40, 20 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

There are lots of federations, including Germany and Malaysia. Are you suggesting we adopt the same disambiguation conventions for all of them on the basis of their form of government? (And isn't Canada actually a confederation?) Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)Reply