Standardising on terms in place names

[Administrator]

There's a very long discussion going on under the Sratford Canal, of all things, on what are the best terms to use for place names, especially around things like ends of tunnels and aqueducts.

It's getting very difficult to follow, so I'm suggesting we continue it here.

For the record, my views (and I know I don't have a veto here!) are:
- I'm happy with the move from \"North\" to \"Northern\" (etc)
- I don't particular care which of \"end\", \"entrance\" or \"portal\"  is used for tunnels, although  my preference is for the latter
- I really don't like \"entrance\" for aqueducts
- History should trump consistency: Standedge has always had a Diggle and a Marsden Portal for example
- As Fowler said in other circumstances, where the rule leads to something that is particularly convoluted or un-euphonius we should not hesitate to break our own rules
- Local usage should trump our rules.  If something is known locally as, say, \"North shore\", then that's what we should call it.

[Shultzy]

Sorry about the Stratford Canal discussion I should have moved it here earlier. Below is a summary of suggestions:

Words in brackets should be lowercase, and if possible at the end of the line.

\"ern\" added to north, south, east and west.

the \"end\" as in \"north end\" to denote the entrance to a tunnel/lake/marina etc. changed to \"entrance\", but not aqueducts.

\"portal\" changed to \"entrance\" or perhaps left as \"portal\"

Accented character in foreign names should be observed.

The difficulty is knowing if there is a local term without pouring through the various guides.
If anyone disagrees with the above, post here.

[Peter Stockdale]

Fine with me to discuss further in this forum and abandon the thread in the Stratford-on-Avon Canal discussion place.--Peter Stockdale

[Stephen Atty]

That's what these forums are for - for discussing things that really have overflowed the place discussion

[Aegidian]

Probably best not to get too hung up on North versus Northern except where one is the accepted or published usage, and the other isn't.

It's not a cardinal sin though. (b'dum tish!)

That said, I think it's important that this website is a navigational tool, not a historical document.

Where a historic name or spelling has been superseded by a modern one, the one that is in common use (in signage at the place, or in other published guides) should be used, and the historic one added to the aliases for the place.