Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of works with different titles in the United Kingdom and United States

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep Sufficient consensus to keep. Article need better sourcing but not deletion Mike Cline (talk) 02:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of works with different titles in the United Kingdom and United States[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an arbitrary and perpetually incomplete list. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I agree with the nominator, there's nothing specially notable about the inclusion criterion, and such a list can never be complete. JIP | Talk 06:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:IINFO CTJF83 chat 10:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Remove from British-American English differences, but keep as part of arts-related lists and emphasize interesting marketing aspects as the inclusion criteria. --Wicked247 (talk) 13:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If I trusted its accuracy, this list would be fascinating. However, it's totally unsourced, and all of these are "take my word for it" things. Even the links are suspect-- usually, this type of factoid is buried in a trivia section about a film, novel, candy bar, etc., and generally not sourced there either. A lot of times, it's just an urban legend, such as the one that the Chevy Nova had to have a different name in Latin America because "no va" means "it doesn't go" -- not repeated as often now, but not really true to begin with [1]. Maybe the Snickers bar was/is called a Marathon bar over in the U.K., maybe it wasn't, I can't be sure. Mandsford (talk) 13:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I don't see the list as arbitrary, as the article shows transAtlantic name changes are very common. It doesn't have to be "perpetually incomplete" either, there are after all a finite number of such works. Add sources and keep. There's no mention of the Nova. EamonnPKeane (talk) 19:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and add sources per above. Oh and Mandsford - Marathon was indeed the old name for Snickers in this part of the world [2].Keresaspa (talk) 19:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Thanks, Keresaspa! Mandsford (talk) 01:09, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This article is interesting and valuable, though I do agree that more references are needed. I made efforts to include references for the items I've included/added to, such as The New York Times reference for Suede/The London Suede U.S. name change and the Official Website of the State of Indiana reference for an official definition of the term "Hoosier". Darwin's Bulldog (talk) 01:29, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments.
- I agree that this article doesnt belong in the English differences category. A few titles become proverbial, but most are not part of the lexicon.
- As to perpetually incomplete, the list already has {{Dynamic list}}. EamonnPKeane's comment is wildly optimistic.
- As to lack of references, adding {{Refimprove}} is more appropriate than deletion (unless one claims the items are inherently unverifiable, which I would dispute).
- As to arbitrariness, I think there is a worrying vagueness over what "Works" encompasses, or where to draw the line between "title of work" and "brand name of product". I would argue food and toys are definitely out, and games are borderline. The GI Joe movie was not called "Action Man" in the UK. Also, with genericised trademarks, we move away from titles to general vocabulary.

jnestorius^(talk) 11:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep Because I am not sure of the purpose of a selective list like these--there are hundreds of other works. For example, about 1/3 of PGWodehouse's novels had different titles; a there's a bibliography, I could add them all. Almost all of what is there can be very easily sourced. Forthe ones it libraries, it's just a matter of finding the catalog records. DGG ( talk ) 18:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good comparison. Dew Kane (talk) 05:52, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.