Talk:Geshtinanna

Mythology Low‑importance

	Mythology portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Religion Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merger proposal[edit]

Geshtinana en Geshtinanna is the same goddess, I assume? - Andre Engels 21:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sumerophile merged Gestinanna and Geshtinana to Ngeshtin-ana on 22 March 2008. I history-merged Ngeshtin-ana into Geshtinanna (revisions up to 19:54, 2 March 2008), before moving Geshtinanna back to Ngeshtin-ana. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:18, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move to Geshtinanna[edit]

Geshtinanna is by far the more common name and it is the one that is used in the article. I do not know why the title of the article is Ngeshtin-ana since this name is rarely ever used and is fairly obscure. I tried to move this page myself, but I cannot do so because Geshtinanna is already a redirect to this page. If someone who is an administer could please move this page, I would greatly appreciate it. --Katolophyromai (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gestinanna, without the "h", or Geshtinanna? – wbm1058 (talk) 20:18, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

With the 'h.' I apologize. The spelling without the 'h' in the heading was a typo. --Katolophyromai (talk) 23:24, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 May 2017[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. wbm1058 (talk) 02:47, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ngeshtin-ana → Geshtinanna – Geshtinanna is, by far, the more common version of the name. It is the version used by nearly all my sources, including Samuel Noah Kramer and others. It is also the name used by Encyclopaedia Britannica [1], The University of Pennsylvania Museum website [2], Thorkild Jacobsen [3], and dozens others. The only reason why I am requesting for the page to be moved rather than simply moving it myself is because Geshtinanna is currently a redirect page to Ngeshtin-ana. Katolophyromai (talk) 16:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Yashovardhan (talk) 16:12, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think this move requires to be discussed first as it could be controversial. Yashovardhan (talk) 16:12, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Yashovardhan Dhanania:, what do you think would be controversial about this move? The spelling Geshtinanna is used by almost all the sources dealing with Mesopotamian mythology and it is also the name used in all the Wikipedia articles on the subject. --Katolophyromai (talk) 16:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My search for Ngeshtin-ana doesn't come up empty. It seems that there are several valid spelling variants of this (which I don't think is unusual with topics like this). I'm not sure any of these can be claimed as flat-out misspellings.
- Ng or just G?
- Gesht or just Gest?
- Anna or ana?
- Hyphen or not?

Given that this has been stable on the current title since March 2008, I think it's worth discussion. If there was one single obvious best spelling, I'd think it would have moved there before now. wbm1058 (talk) 20:31, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article should list the valid variants, and explain the reasons for them. wbm1058 (talk) 20:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ngeshtin-ana is an alternative spelling and so is Geštinanna. There are also several other variant spellings, but Geshtinanna is the most common spelling, which is why I think it should be the one used for the title of the article. I am not arguing that the other spellings are never used; I am simply arguing that Geshtinanna is much more common.

The most likely reason why the article has not been moved until now is because it receives almost no traffic whatsoever. The pageview analysis shows that this article receives an average of only fourteen views per day ([4]). For comparison, Ninshubur, another article about a relatively minor Sumerian deity, receives an average of twenty-one page views per day ([5]) and Isimud receives an average of roughly eighteen page views per day ([6]). For an article that receives such little attention, there would be no reason to expect that anyone would bother trying to have the page moved, even if the title used a fairly obscure alternative spelling. My point in all of this is that it would make the most sense for the title of the article to be Geshtinanna simply because that spelling is the most commonly used. --Katolophyromai (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support either Gestinanna or Geshtinanna Genealogizer (talk) 17:30, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I support Geshtinanna, which is the name I have been arguing for this whole time. I only wrote Gestinanna once and that was a typo. --Katolophyromai (talk) 18:52, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The other members of this discussion seem to have disappeared: @Genealogizer:, @Wbm1058:, @Yashovardhan Dhanania:. Are we going to finish this discussion and reach a conclusion or not? So far, I have yet to see anyone present any valid objections for why this article should not be moved to Geshtinanna. It is the most common spelling so it is the one we should use. While it is true that Ngeshtin-ana is used on some rare occasions, it is not nearly as widely accepted as simply Geshtinanna. Furthermore, Geshtinanna is the spelling I have used in all the other articles where I have mentioned her. While I would not be at all opposed to including a list of spelling variants in the article, I do not think that using an obscure and seldom-used variant of the name for the title of the article is a wise decision. --Katolophyromai (talk) 17:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any objections, however we generally let requests like this run for a full week in the Wikipedia:Requested moves listing, to allow more time for comments. wbm1058 (talk) 18:05, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I echo Wbm1058. Sorry Katolophyromai, I somehow missed your first ping there. As you can see, some editors have things to discuss about this move. I have no opinion on this move as I remain completely unaware of this area. So my !vote could be counted as neutral without prejudice. The RM will expire on 5 June 2017 after which an uninvolved editor can close this. Yashovardhan (talk) 18:15, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gehstinanna would be good IMHO Genealogizer (talk) 23:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support Geshtinanna. Paul August ☎ 01:34, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.