Talk:Southern Alps

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Deleted poor references to the boundaries. User talk:Alan Liefting

Accuracy problems[edit]

There are more than 3100 glaciers in NZ over 1 hectare in size, I believe the 360 figure is from an old estimate in the 60's. I don't have time to find a good citation for that figure though.

I've also found several sources claiming that the Australian plate is being subducted, not the Pacific, in the South Island. The two plates interact differently in different areas of the country. Graphia (talk) 09:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Care to share those several sources? I believe neither plate is subducting under the other in the central South Island, although subduction is occurring offshore to the northeast and perhaps the southwest. I agree the article is inaccurate, at least. I'll delete that bit from the article. -- Avenue (talk) 02:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I've tracked down a source for the number of glaciers, and added that to the article. I'll try to find something more definitive about the plate boundary. -- Avenue (talk) 03:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Southern Alps?[edit]

Can we have a section that discusses why it's called the Southern Alps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bumblebritches57 (talkcontribs) 16:00, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

New Zealand Southern Alps[edit]

This page was boldly changed to "New Zealand Southern Alps" which as a name neither exists officially or colloquially and as such the article's title is now absolutely wrong. There is perhaps some justification in qualifying the name to Southern Alps (New Zealand) as there do appear to be other "Southern Alps" in the world although not that Google really knows about. Andrewgprout (talk) 19:10, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution Andrewgprout. I agree with you, maybe "Southern Alps (New Zealand)" would be better. However: there are of course the Southern Alps of the (European) Alps, those of the Australian Alps and also the Japanese Southern Alps (among others). There are so many other ranges called after the European Alps and obviously most of them have a southern part. Whether Google finds those names or not mostly depends on the user I think. The term "New Zealand Southern Alps", for instance, is also used in the geoscientific literature, even by scholars from New Zealand (e.g. ). Anyway, I consider it a very good idea to rename the page to "Southern Alps (New Zealand). Best, --oc 19:38, 13 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by OCpro (talkcontribs)

Requested move 29 November 2015[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: Technical close. I have closed this RM, because I have move the page article back to Southern Alps. I have done this for several reasons. The first was that it was a move without consensus and can be moved back under WP:RMUM. The second is that the initial move was a clear breach of WP:TITLEVAR and also the creation of a new dab page with text copied from Southern Alps (disambiguation) was a copyright infringement (see WP:CWW). It may be that there is a consensus to move the page, and to ascertain that those who wish to move the page may immediately initiate an RM to do so. However given the support already expressed for moving the page back in this rm, those making such a move request ought to consider if such a request would be disruptive. PBS (talk) 11:04, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

– The Southern Alps of New Zealand are the primary topic. The following data table supports this conclusion. Considering all of this data, the term term "Southern Alps" is overwhelmingly about the mountain range in New Zealand. According to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, we should move this article to Southern Alps and move Southern Alps to Southern Alps (disambiguation)hike395 (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Supporting data[edit]

New Zealand Europe
Search term used "Southern Alps" "New Zealand" -Europe -Italy -France "Southern Alps" (Europe OR Italy OR France) -"New Zealand"
Google Books results 43,300 24,400
Google News results 2,820 315
Dab links I just resolved 24 5
Last 60 days of WP traffic 4,455 150

After including data for Japan (per comment, below):

New Zealand Europe Japan
Search term used "Southern Alps" "New Zealand" -Europe -Italy -France -Japan "Southern Alps" (Europe OR Italy OR France) -"New Zealand" -Japan "Southern Alps" Japan -"New Zealand" -Europe -Italy -France
Google Books results 41,500 23,300 1,660
Google News results 1,980 240 29
Dab links I just resolved 24 5 0
Last 60 days of WP traffic 4,455 150 1,043 (all Akaishi Mountains traffic)


  • Oppose the above results are a textbook demonstration of a case of no absolute majority, even with 5,700 Google Books results for Southern Alps (Japan) missing. Plus Wikipedia users in Europe are obviously not going to benefit from this change. Nor will dab engine pick up mislinks anymore. A really bad idea. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:32, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, September 2015, recent but looks like a reasonable WP:MOVE. In any case it would have been better if RM had started from the baseline - this way WikiProject NewZealand will be receiving alerts and WikiProject Japan, France, Italy, Switzerland, Austria won't receive alerts. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:38, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
@In ictu oculi: I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by "no absolute majority". I re-did the queries with Japan (and proper exclusions, above). Google Books seems like the weakest in support, and it's 62% of the mentions. Did you want to see it higher?
What I see in the statistics: we're making a large number of readers (~2200/month) from around the world go through an unnecessary dab step to get to the information they need. I think having Southern Alps (New Zealand) be the primary topic would be a substantial net benefit for our readers. —hike395 (talk) 22:32, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
I got about 50% in Google Books - the point is we'd need something like 70 or 80% to justify bamboozling European or Japan based readers. I also hope that there's no over-weighting of Southern Hemisphere !votes in this RM due to alerts and watched pages. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:42, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. This article was at Southern Alps until a user unilaterally moved it to New Zealand Southern Alps and then it was moved to Southern Alps (New Zealand). So really, unless there is a consensus that the move was a good idea, it should be moved back. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per In ictu oculi. Film Fan 21:56, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support because in my (British) experience it is the common name. Contrary to what has been suggested above, Wikipedia users in Europe (well, Britain anyway!) will benefit because the term "Southern Alps" is used to refer to the mountains in New Zealand and not those in the southern part of the Alps. However, I have no strong objection to "Southern Alps (New Zealand)" except to suggest "Southern Alps, New Zealand" is maybe more in line with WP:NATURALDIS. Thincat (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per Good Ol'factory, if there was no reason to move it, then it should be restored and a new RM should be instigated, if necessary. As far as I'm concerned, reliable sources point to the Southern Alps being those in New Zealand, and other results are secondary. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:37, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. Well-reasoned argument from nom, with strong evidence. The previous status quo is more helpful to our readers and editors. Dohn joe (talk) 01:45, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, as it's the primary topic as already outlined by other editors. Procedurally and with the benefit of hindsight, an admin should have moved all the articles back to where they were before this unilateral action, and if we then want to discuss whether there is change needed, well, that should have started after the previous status quo was restored. Schwede66 02:23, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, as per nom and other arguments given above. Clearly the primary topic. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, the European name is a very specialised geological term and I think is totally unimportant to this discussion, The Japanese alps I have more sympathy with but are an alternative English name for a mountain range with another local name. In the searches above we need to be careful not to be counting general mentions of the word "southern" with "alps" as opposed to "The Southern Alps" which is the name of a whole Mountain range. Andrewgprout (talk) 06:24, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support – yes, sufficiently the primary topic, with long-term significance. sst✈(discuss) 09:34, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, per nom and other excellent arguments above. Paora (talk) 10:09, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

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.

Requested move 30 November 2015[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: No move. In closing, I considered both this RM and the previous one. Taking account of the original move in September, it's somewhat difficult to shake out, but it's clear that the consensus is that this is the primary topic of the term "Southern Alps". The majority of !votes in the two discussions favored this outcome, backed up by convincing arguments and evidence. Cúchullain t/c 17:20, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

– There is no clear primary topic, since the Southern Alps of Europe are just as notable as those of New Zealand; so "Southern Alps" should be the disambiguation page. The above decision was reached in record time and was a "technical close", which has not allowed for a full discussion or a worldwide view. Even if we accept the fairly basic statistics above, the result is insufficient to claim the New Zealand range is the primary topic over the Southern Alps of Europe. However, I have re-run the stats myself and found that they are quite unreliable. Moreover, the fact that the sources frequently use the term "New Zealand's Southern Alps" or "Southern Alps of New Zealand" indicates that disambiguation is needed. Bermicourt (talk) 21:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

@Bermicourt: Could you share your statistics (if you are getting different answers)? I started out with no opinion about the name, until I found that ~80% of my disambiguations were for New Zealand, then I checked Google's statistics and was convinced of the primary topic. —hike395 (talk) 03:58, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Later: Britannica's article on "Southern Alps" refers to the mountain range in New Zealand [1], as does the Columbia Encyclopedia [2] and Merriam-Webster [3]. —hike395 (talk) 04:25, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. IMO Southern Alps of Europe are probably more notable but I support suggested change. МандичкаYO 😜 08:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Can you guys please read the article Southern Alps (Europe) and actually understand that apart from this very specialised geological meaning of limited usage there is no mountain range called the Southern Alps in Europe.Andrewgprout (talk) 08:41, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Actually if you read the sources, that's not true. The Southern Alps are a range of mountains (covering an area of 500 km by 50-150km) as well as a geological unit, just like the Northern Limestone Alps or Western Carpathians. And then there's the generic use of the term for the southern part of the Alps. So the article needs improving to reflect that. --Bermicourt (talk) 09:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
I've done better than read the article - there are numerous sources that support the Southern Alps of Europe as being a mountain range/distinct region. Otherwise it would be southern or south Alps.[4][5][6][7][8][9] МандичкаYO 😜 10:10, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I think that the NZ range is in fact a relatively clear primary topic. The other encyclopedias info presented by hike395 is quite persuasive, IMO. The other meanings of Southern Alps are pretty peripheral, I think. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. As per Good Ol’factory, as well as the compelling statistics and arguments presented in support of the reverse requested move of 29 November. Paora (talk) 10:28, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. There's enough cultural imperialism from the Yanks and the Aussies without the Kiwis getting in on the act too. (Clearly the Brits are blameless in this matter ....) Wikipedia is there, in the first instance, for it's readers, not as a vanity project for those of us who contribute to it. The (even) more serious point is that if wikipedia aspires to be used internationally, then the safest route here is to avoid "favo(u)ring" either the New Zealand or the European version. Be aware that English (a version of it) is fluently used by millions of folks who've never been near England or New Zealand nor even North America. That's a blessing and a curse for those of us who reckon we "own it" as our mother tongue. But your audience when you contribute to wikipedia is a whole lot larger that people who grew up in current and / or former territories of the British Empire. And if anyone has time and sources to improve either or both of these entries, please do it! Right now if you want to know about the climate and the glaciers of the NZ Southern Alps from wikpedia, then it helps if you like to read German. Regards Charles01 (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose, for same reasons as yesterday.... Dohn joe (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose, Any Southern Alp in Europe is a sub unit of the Alps proper a searcher looking for the Alps will search or start from this page. Southern Alps does not have that luxury. It has not been demonstrated that an entity called the southern alps exists in Europe apart from the narrow sense of the existing page. Lots of words but no actual evidence. Andrewgprout (talk) 18:08, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
    • Comment Sorry, you clearly don't understand (or want to understand) the geography. There is no such thing as "a Southern Alp"; but there is a huge mountain range in Europe called the "Southern Alps"; the fact that it's also part of the Alps is neither here nor there. And to deny they exist and there are no sources flies in the face of the stats above and suggests you haven't even bothered to google it. Why not just be honest and say that, as a New Zealander, your POV is that the Southern Alps of New Zealand are the primary topic.
Meanwhile here are a couple of the 20,000+ sources: The Western Alps by de Graciansky, Roberts and Tricart, has a map showing the approximate extent of the (500 x 150 km) Southern Alps on p. 32, the International Sedimentary Petrographical Series by Moritz and Schürmann has chapters on the "Areal Definition and Significance of the Southern Alps" and "Stratigraphy of the Southern Alps" Bermicourt (talk) 19:45, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
exactly - in the unopposed limited geological sense as described in the current article - and please do not question my neutral point of view - pots and kettles maybe.Andrewgprout Andrewgprout (talk) 19:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Although I do not agree with you regarding the "exclusively geological understanding" of the name Southern Alps in Europe, would such a "limited" geological use (and the "limited" Japanese and so on) not justify a disambuigation page "Southern Alps"? From my non-NZ point of view I would say yes, but of course I do not consider my opinion to be the only right one. OCpro (talk)oc 17:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment. I did a very casual google search for "Southern Alps", removing any Wikipedia results ("Southern Alps" -Wikipedia). Every single one of the hits on the first 20 results pages used the term in reference to the NZ range. I stopped looking for other uses after going through 20 pages (ie, the first 200 hits). It seems pretty primary to me. Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support as per Charles01 because Southern Alps (New Zealand) gives immediate clarity, and will easily be returned by a search just on 'Southern Alps'. I believe that the majority of people of the world - perhaps with the exception of many in New Zealand - think of the European Alps when they hear the word 'The Alps'. But let's follow that logic along: the rest of the world are then just as likely to assume that the 'Southern Alps' are the southern part of The Alps in Europe, so Southern Alps (New Zealand) seems a logical name to apply to that article. Maybe it somehow hurts national pride to have brackets after a Wikipedia title, but common sense should be to help the user, not anyone's feelings of pride.
Are Wikipedia users expected to understand a subject before they look it up, or are we actually trying to help people find stuff here? I go with the latter approach and urge clarity and common sense, and avoid bowing to those who not unreasonably have pride in a regional name and some damned fine mountains that I'd personally love to climb. If we use the term 'Southern Alps', it begs the question "southern to what?" So let's tell people. I'd be quite happy to support Alps being changed to Alps (Europe) if that helps, too - and for precisely the same reasons I have outlined. Parkywiki (talk) 22:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
This approach kind of flies in the face of the very concept of WP:PRIMARYUSAGE. Yes, we could disambiguate Southern Alps, and Alps, and everything else on Wikipedia, and it would indeed make things "clearer", but that's not the way consensus has concluded we should go. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm. Why not Be Bold and just go with common sense, clarity and helping users. Or do rules rule? Parkywiki (talk) 03:42, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
They're not really rules, they're guidelines based on consensus. And presumably, the previous consensus is based upon collective "common sense". Of course, one person's common sense is another person's absurdity, so one user's idea of what constitutes common sense is probably not a very good standard to use in isolation. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support – I would suppose the southern alps were in Europe and I had no idea until today that there were any alps in New Zealand. So IMO the title is highly ambiguous without a qualifier. Oculi (talk) 23:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose move as proposed. I haven't (yet) seen new evidence or hard data that changes my mind from the previous move discussion. —hike395 (talk) 05:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, per WP:COMMONNAME and per reasoning from Andrewgprout. The mountains in Europe are the Alps; the mountains in New Zealand are the Southern Alps.Daveosaurus (talk) 06:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support – Thanks for this interesting discussion. I did not expect such a debate. I think the question is whether this article is considered an article for New Zealand readers, or one for an international readership. Regarding the number of google results it is of course no surprise that there are more results related to NZ (given that English is not spoken in the Alps of Europe). If we compare scientific results (where English is the common language also in the European Alps), then we find 14000 results for '"Southern Alps" AND "Europe"', and 15000 results for '"Southern Alps" AND "New Zealand"' on (which I consider a good source of information). To be clear: I am not at all against a "Southern Alps" article that directs to the New Zealand range's article, but knowing the situation from other countries which also use this term for "their" range I thought it would be a good idea to direct to a disambiguation page. Anyway, thanks for the discussion.OCpro (talk) 17:12, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support – Once again a bit of a travesty by people who don't know the guidelines for objectively establishing primary topics. It doesn't suffice to shout out primarytopic, it has to be underpinned by data such as page visits, incoming links, occurences in other sources, and the likes. And those do not designate a clear primary topic. It will even be geographically biased as most Europeans will never have heard of the NZ Alps. PS: even if there is no clear consensus, then the article will have to be moved, as no consensus means: no consensus for having a primary topic. --Midas02 (talk) 06:17, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
    • A careful read will reveal that users have been doing more than shouting primarytopic. In this and the discussion above (which happened just days ago), it has been pointed out that other encyclopedias have the topic of the NZ range under the undisambiguated "Southern Alps". This is an example of occurrances in other sources. Also above, I mentioned that at least the first 200-hits in a Google search are hits that refer to the NZ range. This discussion is about whether to move the article: no consensus results in no move. It does not result in a move, because the discussion is not proposing a primary topic. Looks like you might want to brush up on some of the technical guidelines regarding move proposals and lack of consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:06, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Neutral - I would not dispute that the range in New Zealand is a reasonable primary topic only considering the term "Southern Alps" alone and supportive data has been provided for that in the previous RM. However, given that the term "Alps" almost exclusively refers to the range in Europe, it is potentially confusing to use "Southern Alps" for any unrelated topic and that should be put in the balance too. So, just blindly applying Wikipedia:Primary topic is questionable in this case. I'm not sure what the best solution is but if this page is left undisambiguated, I suggest having a note on the top like : Not to be confused with the southern section of the Alps. For other uses, see Southern Alps (disambiguation). ZachG (Talk) 17:18, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
@ZachG: Although I've !voted differently below I think your remarks are thoughtful and helpful. Just to remark (because I have just learned this) the "Southern Alps (Europe)" are not where the "southern section of the Alps" is! There can be a three-way confusion. Thincat (talk) 11:50, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Indeed. Everything seems to be potentially confusing. Being bold, I added hatnotes where I thought they were necessary. Feel free to change them. ZachG (Talk) 13:22, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose, as the New Zealand mountain range is the primary topic. I like Good Ol’factory's simple test that shows this. Schwede66 18:19, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. A major mountain range (the premier mountains of a not-insignificant English-speaking country) is more significant than a portion of another mountain range. We aren't required to follow the decisions of other encyclopedias, but being guided by them is almost always a good idea, and I don't see why we should reject the titles of the pages that Hike395 has found. Moreover, Andrewgprout makes a solid point: our current article about the European mountains refers to a geological topic, not merely the southern region of the European mountain range. Lots of readers will be surprised to see that the Southern Alps in Europe are nowhere near Barcelonnette and Grenoble. I see no reason to remove this article from its current primary location because of an article that's not talking about the region that most readers might expect. Nyttend (talk) 23:07, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
  • PS, on my final point — how many of those <"Southern Alps" and Europe> search results are talking about the region near Barcelonnette and Grenoble? How many of those results are using the term exclusively for a region that extends only from Maribor to the eastern edge of Switzerland? Nyttend (talk) 23:17, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Southern Alps in a European context has more than one meaning. One of the biggest stories of the year was an Airbus crash in the "southern Alps", and it wasn't in NZ. --Midas02 (talk) 01:47, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
There is as said above a big difference between the "Southern Alps" A mountain range named after the European Alps in much the same way as "New York" was named after the real "York" and the simply descriptive southern Alps as you mention. Incidentally the plane did not crash anywhere near the definition of the Southern Alps (Europe) page which this discussion is mostly about. Just about every place mentioned in this Encyclopedia has a southern portion and almost all of them do not have a page for this southern portion or the need to disambiguate such non existent pages.
I think Geography of the Alps would be a good basis check our thinking - this long existing and uneventful page lists subdivisions of the alps. None of these subdivisions are called the "Southern Alps" Andrewgprout (talk) 02:35, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand why there are distinct articles on the Southern Limestone Alps and Southern Alps (Europe). The articles use the same maps, and don't explain why they are different. Isn't this an example of a content fork? Shouldn't these be merged? —hike395 (talk) 04:59, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
You are right, the difference seems to be that not all parts of the Southern Alps of Europe are formed by limestone. In general, I don't really understand why wikipedians use rather superficial Wikipedia articles to support their arguments. According to scientific literature (source can be found on google scholar or google books), the Southern Alps of Europe are—in the narrow sense—both a geographical and a geolocial subdivision of the Eastern European Alps (both disciplines show a similar, although not the same definition). It's also no surprise that, in the broader sense, non-scientific articles consider any part south of the main ridge as "southern Alps." And once again: language clearly biases the google results cited above. In the case of New York and York, there is IMO no doubt about the primary topic (if New York were still called New Amsterdam this could be very different ...); especially because a "new" part of York is not really known I think (there is no widely known New York in Britain). Contrary to the Southern Alps in Japan, Europe and elsewhere. If no consensus can be found, why don't we follow Zacharie Grossen's neutral opinion? OCpro (talk) 13:27, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per nom and OCpro. Film Fan 10:50, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose but if I'm required to provide statistically significant evidence then I can't. At the last discussion I googled "Southern Alps" and manually ignored hits with lower case s and upper case S in book titles and starts of sentences. For about a couple of dozen all but one were for New Zealand but one was an advertisement for holidays in Europe. For me, in Britain, the capitalised proper name is of the mountains in New Zealand. If someone referred to "Southern Alps" in Europe I would have to ask where they meant because my mental image is of a long and thin chain going east–west. I can understand a wish for titles to be unambiguous but our policy is to be brief for primary topics[10] and I happen to agree with this. For me this is an absolutely clear case for applying the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC guideline. Thincat (talk) 11:15, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose It is a name not a location. Eddaido (talk) 12:24, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per Talk:Southern Alps (New Zealand) RM just closed. No evidence has been presented that Users in Europe think of New Zealand, and Google Books shows no case for applying WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, since the results in books are evenly split. Having the New Zealand Southern Alps on the baseline will continue to collect mislinks to Southern Alps (Europe) and Southern Alps (Japan). In ictu oculi (talk) 13:51, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
  • In ictu oculi What do you mean by "No evidence has been presented that Users in Europe think of New Zealand" do you mean those who's primary language is English (UK and Ireland), or all "users" in Europe? I do not understand what you mean by "Google Books shows no case for applying WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, since the results in books are evenly split" are you commenting on the statistics presented by user:Hike395 with this edit (22:24, 29 November 2015) or some other Google Books survey? -- PBS (talk) 15:28, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
I am repeating my observations from the first RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:31, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Dear colleagues, if we exclusively consider results on the UK's google website the following ratio results: 467,000 hits for "Southern Alps" vs. 360,000 hits for "Southern Alps" -"New Zealand". This means that about 75% of the UK results of "Southern Alps" don't have a NZ context. Just for giving some concrete facts on the use of "Southern Alps" in a major part of English-speaking Europe. OCpro (talk) 17:07, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello, OC. You have to be careful when you do this sort of search. First, you have to turn off personalization by adding "&pws=0" at the end. Second, it's better to require the geography that you want, and forbid the geography that you don't want. The following searches provide the results. I tried on both UK and US, and got the same results, so I don't think Google gives you nation-specific results.
Query to Google Number of results
"Southern Alps" +"New Zealand" -Japan -Europe -Italy -France -Austria -Slovenia -Switzerland 381,000
"Southern Alps" -"New Zealand" -Japan (Europe OR Italy OR France OR Austria OR Slovenia OR Switzerland) 176,000
"Southern Alps" +Japan -"New Zealand" -Europe -Italy -France -Austria -Slovenia -Switzerland 7
Again, it's about 68%. And, as you say above, it's terribly unclear whether the people who query Google for Southern Alps want Wikipedia's technically narrow Southern Alps (Europe) article. I think that the technical narrowness of the article is reflected in the traffic statistics, where our readers prefer the New Zealand article 30:1, which to me is overwhelming.
So, I think I will stick with my Oppose !vote. —hike395 (talk) 04:55, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
If you add to the end of the search "site:uk", then the results returned will be for UK registered domains, which can be used a rough approximation for national usage. However since 2008, when the policy WP:AT was altered to use WP:V and its definition of reliable sources, searches of unreliable sources are not usually considered useful (unless the subject is something from popular culture where there is a dearth of reliable sources, and even then the sources returned need to be further filtered by eye to pick out the more reliable from the dross) -- which is why editors tend to use other types of surveys such as: what other encyclopaedias use, and searches of Google Books and Google Scholar. -- PBS (talk) 10:57, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I think you are right hike395, but do (language-biased) 68% represent a sufficient high number? Personally, I am not sure. Further, as PBS notes, other sources such as Google Scholar in particular (here I got almost a 50/50 ratio, as mentioned above), could be taken into account. In scientific literature the language bias seems (IMO) to be lowest as English is the lingua franca. Moreover, using your search terms (those in the table) in combination with "site:uk" I also get 50/50 ratio between NZ and EU Southern Alps (about 9000 hits each); with an Australian "site:au" I get 11000 NZ hits and 9000 EU hits, and with a Canadian "site:ca" even a 2000 NZ vs. 8000 EU hits ratio results on my screen. Anyway, I personally think a primary topic case clearly does not exist outside NZ, best, OCpro (talk) oc 16:46, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose give me strength. Nothing has changed since the last time. And it's nice to see the massive amount of evidence in favour of the primary topic which is clearly those which splendidly divide Aotearoa. Fush and chups anyone? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:15, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment. Just a note on a side-discussion to this issue that users might be interested in: Category:Southern Alps has also been nominated here for renaming. Don't ask me why both are going on simultaneously! Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:55, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose, seems a clear case of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. I thought this debate was decided last month. Mattlore (talk) 05:42, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per last time. sst✈(discuss) 09:07, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. Ambiguous. The Alps are in Europe. They are extensive and "southern" reads as an adjective. "Southern Alps" will be read as the southern regions of the Alps by anyone familiar with European mountains and not familiar with New Zealand mountains. If "The Southern Alps" was acceptable, I would support that, as it is clearly a proper name, not confusable with a descriptive name. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

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.

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Southern Alps. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:52, 22 January 2018 (UTC)