Talk:Siege of Bursa

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Ottoman / Medieval This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Ottoman military history task force Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500) Middle Ages Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Greece Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Former countries: Ottoman Empire This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles This article is supported by WikiProject Ottoman Empire (assessed as Low-importance).

• Siege of Bursa - 21 results
• Siege of Prusa - 19 results

Takabeg (talk) 17:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is supposed to mean that the article should be moved, I guess. The difference in search results is however really not big enough. I'd prefer an argument based on recognizability, but then someone else would come along and say that for historical battles we use historical names, etc. Unless there is a compelling reason to move, don't. Constantine ✍ 18:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not Necessary. I only wanted to compare them :) I "simply and solely" prefer "common use" in English, if there was no controversy. What do you think of Talk:Battle of Ankara#Battle of Angora and Talk:Siege of Shkodër ? Takabeg (talk) 19:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A bit off topic, but we're probably alone here ;) On Shkoder/Scutari, I support Scutari, for the reasons others too have stated. On Ankara, IMO the correct way would be to compare [1] with [2], i.e. post-1900 results. And if one discounts the dozens of reprints of Gibbon, the number for "Angora" is even lower. Similarly, if in 400 years the Siege of Scutari is more commonly referred to in literature as "Siege of X", then I'd support that one. Constantine ✍ 19:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Σας ευχαριστώ. Takabeg (talk) 10:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]