Category talk:Zürichsee

 Keep: de:Zürichsee (not Lake Zurich oder Lake Zurich) is the official name of this Swiss lake located in the Swissgerman-speaking canton of Zürich, as used in German Wikipedia and mentioned in EN-WP (Lemma -> Swiss German/Alemannic: Zürisee; German: Zürichsee <-), too! 23:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

• I agree that "Zürichsee" is the German name for the lake and probably the one that should be used for the gallery (according to Commons:Galleries#Naming_conventions), but for categories, the English language name should be used (according to Commons:Categories#Category_name). The category used to be named in English and I asked to have its history undeleted to figure out how it was moved away from that. Redirects can still lead from one to the other. -- User:Docu/en:User:Docu, June 18, 2009.

• • The move have been requested by a Swiss user who tried to get some order in the strange language mix in the Swiss lakes. If you look in en:Category:Lakes of Switzerland, you will see that for some lakes, an English term is used, for others the native ones (in the dominant language). As you can see in Category:Lakes in the canton of Zürich, at least all names are consistent. It makes no sense to use in some cases an English names, and in others a local name. --Foroa (talk) 13:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

• • • further discussions here: Category_talk:Requested_moves#Category:Z.C3.BCrichsee_.3D.3E_Category:Lake_Zurich. --Foroa (talk) 06:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Move request 20 feb 2010

except for Lake Constance (which is bordering several countries) all lakes in Category:Lakes of Bavaria are named by their original name. the same is the case for Category:Lakes in the canton of Zürich. it would be more consistent to keep them all the same, or shall all lakes get some artifical English name? 88.77.137.27 07:26, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

That's right, and why it is still like it is now, but in Category:Lakes in the canton of Schwyz the situation is quite different. Lake Zurich has a problem in that it is present in history books since centuries and in most "real" English encyclopedias. --Foroa (talk) 19:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I support commonly used original proper names for individual subjects instead of ad hoc translations. English names should be used for common concepts and group categories generally. Some commonly used English exonyme proper names can be sometimes used but the uniformity and the conformity with the original local proper name is needed to the clarity and international accesibility. --ŠJů (talk) 21:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)