Talk:Giessbachbahn

Trains Mid‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Switzerland Low‑importance

	Switzerland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Switzerland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Switzerland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwitzerlandWikipedia:WikiProject SwitzerlandTemplate:WikiProject SwitzerlandSwitzerland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 19 July 2018[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: consensus to move the page to Giessbachbahn at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 22:02, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Giessbach Funicular → Giessbach funicular – Since ZH8000 has reverted my move with two exclamation marks, I will avoid trying to start an edit war. "Funicular" does not need to be capitalized in the title, per WP:MOSCAPS and WP:NCCAPS (basically, avoid capitalization wherever possible). English is not an official language of Switzerland, and at a glance sources appear to be mixed on usage. Alternatively the article could be named "Giessbachbahn"; I would be fine with that as well. Jc86035 (talk) 07:18, 19 July 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 11:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

oppose @Jc86035: Giessbach Funicular is a direct translation of Giessbachbahn, since bahn here means funicular. I.e. it is part of the name and therefore capitalised. It is a proper name. -- ZH8000 (talk) 13:13, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ZH8000: Just because it's part of the name doesn't necessarily mean it has to be capitalized, as far as I'm aware. I hope you actually read the linked guidelines. Jc86035 (talk) 13:48, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course: WP:NAMECAPS. -- ZH8000 (talk) 13:57, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ZH8000: "Funicular" is not automatically capitalized; Special:Search/insource:funicular does show both non-capitalized and capitalized "funicular". Jc86035 (talk) 14:56, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of the sources in the article, most of them capitalize too many first letters of mid-sentence words to be authoritative on whether to capitalize "funicular" in the article title; for example, the ASME citation capitalizes basically every word that's not "of"/"and" or after a hyphen, including "Coming Soon" (which Wikipedia wouldn't capitalize per MOSCAPS), so we don't know if it's correct about whether this name is supposed to be always capitalized. Jc86035 (talk) 15:00, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

move to Giessbachbahn instead. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:43, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ZH8000, do you object to simply naming the article Giessbachbahn? Dekimasuよ! 07:26, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, but it would against the ccensus among all funiculars in Switzerland, at least (see below) -- ZH8000 (talk) 17:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per MOS:CAPS, WP:NCCAPS, MOS:FOREIGN. When translating something we do not capitalize in the translation except where a proper name appears; we even apply this standard to titles of published works. The exception, of course, is when it's not our translation but a conventional English-language one consistently used in the sources (e.g. Russian Federation, from Russian: Росси́йская Федера́ция, romanized: Rossiyskaya Federatsiya). And bahn obviously does not mean 'funicular', which it does not; it means 'route, way', and by extension it refers to streets and roads, railways, paths, tramways, etc., depending on context and compounding.
I have no objection to Giessbachbahn, either; it may actually be the common name.
— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:42, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A claim was made above that ‘bahn’ translates to ‘funicular’. The word ‘bahn’ in German has many translations into English, but in this context the translation that applies is ‘railway’. I can find no on line source that translates it as ‘funicular. There is a clue in the article as the 19th century poster advertises the railway as ‘Giessbach Drahtseilbahn’. ‘Drahtseilbahn’ translates into English as ‘cable car’ or ‘cable railway’ (the later being the appropriate one here). The English word ‘funicular’ means a conveyance that is powered by a fixed cable (and not necessarily a railway).

For accuracy, this article should be entitled ‘Giessbachbahn funicular’ or Geissbach funicuar’. ‘Giessbachbahn’ though acceptable if there is enough consensus, does not tell anyone that it is a funicular, but only a railway. However, that can be rectified in the opening line of the article because, as far as I am aware, there is no Giessbachbahn that it not a Funicular. 85.255.233.165 (talk) 10:12, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider also:

In German, all kind of railways, funiculars, cable cars etc ends in -bahn. In fact, it is always a short version for either:

railway = Eisenbahn, or

cog railway = Zahnradbahn, or

funicular, cable way = Standseilbahn (cable = Seil, standing = Stand), or

cable car, cable way = Luftseilbahn (air = Luft), or

gondola, cable way = Gondelbahn, or

tramway = Strassenbahn.

Therefore, often in German, when the precise naming is not necessary, or the context is given, you just say Bahn and it means any of them (c.f. late binding in OOP ;-) ).

==> Therefore, you can not say that Giessbachbahn does not translate into Giessbach Funicular, quite the contrary (!), since Giessbachbahn here is just the short version of Giessbach Standseilbahn, see e.g. the current (sic!) Fahrplan Giessbach Standseilbahn und Schiff (en: "Timetable Giessbach Funicular and Boat")!! – This very common shortening is just a function by the German language.

Virtually all Swiss funiclars are named that way in English (and the English name is usually used as the article's name): <Name Funicular>. Therefore, the move to lowercase would be an unusual exception which is against the widespread consensus!! -- ZH8000 (talk) 17:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia. What the German descriptions are or what the German language says is totally irrelevant.

There is pretty well a consensus for ‘Giessbachbahn’ so you are out voted anyway. 148.252.129.18 (talk) 17:50, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LOL (WBTVC), I suppose even the English speaker has the intention - at least the serious ones - to get a correct translation, from whatever language. :-)) -- ZH8000 (talk) 17:57, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well you certainly do not. If you check your own examples above, when you separate the compound words, ‘bahn’ in every instance is ‘(rail)way’. It is the first word (an adjective) that states what kind of railway that it is. As stated already, no source translates ‘bahn’ as ‘funicular’. This is the English Wikipedia. The English are not interested in what a literal translation says. They are only interested in how an English speaker would describe it. 148.252.129.18 (talk) 06:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Giessbachbahn. Clear common name. There's too much unnecessary translation on Wikipedia in clear contravention of WP:USEENGLISH. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:13, 1 August 2018 (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.