The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 06:56, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

La Liga → Spanish Primera División — Relisted. @harej 04:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"La Liga" is a misnomer. It should actually refer to the Liga de Fútbol Profesional, of which this league is part of. At the same time, the moniker "Primera División" can refer to a number of leagues around the world, and neither one holds a clear dominant use of the Primera División name (unlike the Serie A or the Premier League). So, as per a discussion and consensus at WikiProject Football, the format "demonym Primera División" has been chosen as the best naming format for all Primera Divisións. --Digirami (talk) 13:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Primera División Argentina → Argentine Primera División
• Primera División de Chile → Chilean Primera División
• Primera División de Costa Rica → Costa Rican Primera División
• Primera División de Fútbol Profesional → El Salvadorean Primera División
• Primera División de México → Mexican Primera División
• Primera División de Paraguay → Paraguayan Primera División
• Primera División Uruguaya → Uruguayan Primera División
• Primera División Venezolana → Venezuelan Primera División

• Support all moves except La Liga → Spanish Primera División which I think should be moved to the main Primera División, it is the biggest league with that name. It would follow the already existing precedent of the Spanish second and fourth division already being the main topic of Segunda División and Tercera División chandler 13:23, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Oppose - We do not invent English usage, especially when the result is a little-used Spanish-English hybrid. This is a fundamental tenet of WP:NAME resulting from WP:V. Naming of these articles should not be based on the happenstance of the dominant language of the country involved, but on usage in English-language media - even if it is less uniform. The current name might be a slightly unusual anomaly in English usage, but it is the common usage. Knepflerle (talk) 15:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support In all the above examples, Primera Division, with the accent, is the most widely accepted name for each league. The English demonym was the best way to disambiguate them without having to the use a disambiguation in parenthesis. Additionally, English media usage is inconsistent at best when it comes to the Spanish one. ESPN, for example, uses both La Liga and Spanish Primera Division to name this league. La Liga comes from the commercial name of the league, which goes against our naming conventions for football leagues. Digirami (talk) 20:18, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "Primera Division, with the accent, is the most widely accepted name for each league" - you have no proof for this.

• They are already named "Primera Division" (accented) in some way. This vote/discussion brings them to similar naming styles (one widely agreed upon, or at least not objected to, in the WikiProject). Digirami (talk) 23:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "La Liga comes from the commercial name of the league, which goes against our naming conventions for football leagues" - just wrong, no such convention exists. See Veikkausliiga and Gambrinus Liga, amongst others. Knepflerle (talk) 17:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't know the reason for those two, but there we don't have articles with the title "Barclays Premier League", "Serie A TIM", "Liga BBVA", "Liga Sagres", or "Clydesdale Bank Premier League" for a reason. I'm sure other would open a discussion to find a non-commercial name for those other leagues.
• I wonder what ESPN, by far one of the most notable and largest sporting media sources, calls this league in English and Spanish...? Even when a media outlet like that does show the "La Liga" name, it contains information that covers both the Primera and Segunda Divisions. Digirami (talk) 23:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "I don't know the reason for those two..." - it doesn't matter. There is no convention or uniformity, despite you claiming incorrectly that there is. It would be useful for future reference if you could strike through this misleading and incorrect claim of yours, as it is incredibly tiring hearing it repeated over various pages without any actual base in fact whatsoever.

• It matters because we try to keep the names constant. With the ever-changing nature of corporate sponsorship, using the non-commerical name provides a greater of stability for the name of the league. Digirami (talk) 03:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Those are merely your arguments, but they have not been accepted as consensus. There is no consensus and there is no uniformity. Knepflerle (talk) 11:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "I wonder what ESPN, by far one of the most notable and largest sporting media sources, calls this league in Spanish" - completely and utterly irrelevant. It's got nothing to do with usage in English - one does not follow the other closely enough to draw any meaningful conclusion. Knepflerle (talk) 00:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Irrelevant? Is that why you cited ESPN below? Digirami (talk) 03:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Please read my comments carefully. I said it is irrelevant what ESPN calls the competition in Spanish, which you were trying to claim was relevant to English. Knepflerle (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• But I said English and Spanish, so don't misquote me either. Digirami (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I quoted the bit that was irrelevant correctly. Knepflerle (talk) 20:28, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• When you omit words from my original statement, that is misquoting. Digirami (talk) 10:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Well I did accidentally miss out the ellipsis: so ok then "I wonder what ESPN, by far one of the most notable and largest sporting media sources, calls this league ... in Spanish" is irrelevant. Knepflerle (talk) 11:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support moving all the articles to the proposed names, including the Spanish Primera División, as all those leagues are commonly known as just Primera División. The Segunda División and Tercera División of Spain should also be moved to Spanish Segunda División and Spanish Tercera División. Primera División should be a disambiguation page. --Carioca (talk) 20:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "are commonly known as just Primera División." - prove it. This one certainly isn't. Knepflerle (talk) 17:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• It is true. Unless you need to distinguish one from another, or to denote which country it comes from, they are known as "Primera Division". An Argentine in Argentina is going to call his national league "Primera Division", but call it "Argentine Primera Division" to distinguish it from the Uruguayan or Spainish equivalent.
• In much the same vein that you can't prove that when media outlets use "La Liga", they are actually refering to the entire league (1st and 2nd division). Digirami (talk) 23:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "It is true." - I didn't ask for you to repeat yourself, I asked for some proof. In the case of the Spanish league it isn't true, so you'll be hard pressed. Knepflerle (talk) 00:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I provided proof earlier via ESPN. I'll do that again, more: Yahoo! Sports, ESPN, SkySports (and these are media outlets cover a larger market and they actually matter in sports media; most of what you cited a very passive reporters of Spanish soccer and are therefore more likely to use an inaccurate name for the league). Digirami (talk) 03:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Your comment doesn't make sense. I showed use of La Liga in all of your examples above - Sky Sports, Yahoo! and ESPN and others. But of course, they are "passive" if I quote them... Knepflerle (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• No, I say they are passive because they are not dedicated to sports enough, leading to the probability that they might might have it wrong... Which after a search has happened. RTE, for example, used "Primera Liga" to name this league. That's wrong. Which goes to show that there are stronger sources than other. ESPN, SkySports, Yahoo Sports are very reliable strong sources compared to, say, the NY Post (really?). And the three main sport sources use Primera Division (even in live broadcasts as ESPN did last night on Sportscenter). Digirami (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• La Liga refers to LFP (which is Primera and Segunda), see es:Liga de Fútbol Profesional (España) chandler 00:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "see es:Liga de Fútbol Profesional (España)" - irrelevant to English usage. That's what it might be used to mean in Spanish, but it isn't in English. None of soccernews.com [1], the Straits Times [2], Yahoo [3], the Daily Mail [4], the New York Post [5], Sky Sports [6], ESPN [7], The Guardian [8], RTE [9] or even UEFA [10] use that definition in English. In every single one of those cases, La Liga is used to refer to the top flight and only the top flight - each talks about clubs being promoted to or relegated from La Liga and in each case they are being promoted out of or relegated into the Segunda Division. Now that's evidence of English language usage, and the only evidence on this page thus far. Knepflerle (talk) 00:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The point is that "La Liga" is an very inaccurate name of this league. Article titles have to be precise. Since "La Liga" also refers to the LFP (much more accurately, too), having it for the title for just the Primera Division is wrong and goes against a basic tenet of the naming conventions. "Spanish Primera Division" is more precise and accurate, therefore it is a better title. Digirami (talk) 03:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• It's accurate enough for practically every publishing outlet in the English-speaking world to use, and accurate enough for the English-speaking world to understand them - so enough with the linguistic prescriptivism and foisting on English speakers your "improvements" when they have a perfectly good term already. La Liga is accurate and precise enough for most English users to use every day outside Wikipedia, and so it is good enough to use here. Knepflerle (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Not every (unless you want to keep basically ignoring everyone else's sources). And if you search in any of your sources for "Spanish Primera Division" or "Spanish First Division", you will find articles supporting any one of those. Here are some for Primera Division: RTE, The Guardian, The Daily Mail. And then how some of your sources simply don't get it right, like by using Primera Liga: NY Post. The point or sources matter. The stronger sources (ESPN, SkySports, Yahoo! Sports) use Primera Division more than consistent, correctly, and more often than La Liga. In addition, since "La Liga" can also refer to the LFP, it is an ambiguous title and needs to be changed to something more on the spot. Spanish Primera Division is on the spot. Digirami (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "unless you want to keep basically ignoring everyone else's sources" - I've shown use of La Liga in every single news source you've quoted and in others, and you claim I'm ignoring sources? Bizarre.

• Yes, because you act as if your sources are the definitive prove, ignoring the fact that I have proved that ESPN, SkySports, and Yahoo! Sports uses primarily use "Primera Division" and that the others are not consistent when it comes to using the appropriate name for the league. This brings to question the reliablity and/or strength of supporting sources. ESPN, Sky Sports, and Yahoo! Sports are far stronger sources than pretty much anything else, and as I said before, they use "Primera Division". Digirami (talk) 23:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "ESPN, Sky Sports, and Yahoo! Sports are far stronger sources than pretty much anything else, and as I said before, they use "Primera Division"" - and as you repeatedly forget to mention, they also use La Liga, as I demonstrated. Knepflerle (talk) 23:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure, ignore the fact that I had said "Primary" in the previous sentence (that's a big keyword). Arguing that ESPN uses also "La Liga" is the same as arguing that since ESPN also uses "Premiership" and "English Premier League", the Premier League article be titled that. Nope. Digirami (talk) 00:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• You showed no so such "primacy" - just that they Primera Division, a fact I never disputed. What I disputed was your reluctance to even acknowledge that the very same sources are also completely happy to use La Liga. Knepflerle (talk) 09:28, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Of course, because if La Liga was the primary, that term would be at the top of every table. But it is not. Therefore, it is not their primary name for the league. Digirami (talk) 10:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• That is really stretching things - "this is written at the top of the table so it must be better thank anything in the article text!" Knepflerle (talk) 11:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• But one word in a random article is enough, but not a league table (or other tables) people are going to check one a regular basis. Now that is really stretching it. Digirami (talk) 13:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "since "La Liga" can also refer to the LFP" - for the umpteenth time, are any of you ever going to find a source for that, or do you genuinely believe repeating this will make it true? There's ten sources showing this is not true in English, and none to back it up. Knepflerle (talk) 20:28, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• So you don't think that a lot of people might not mistake "La Liga" for the LFP, especially since the first word is "Liga"? Digirami (talk) 23:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• None of the writers or expected audience of the ten sources above were expected to make this "mistake", no. You're assuming a possible mistake fluent readers of English don't make. Knepflerle (talk) 23:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Sky Sports uses Primera Division. The thing still is, La Liga is the equivalent of "The Football League", if we goo back 20 years, we could say "Leeds won the Football League" and "They play in the Football League", but it didn't only cover the first division chandler 09:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "La Liga is the equivalent of "The Football League"" - in English it is not, and the proof is above. In every example above it refers to the top division and only the top division. Please read them carefully. Knepflerle (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• But according to the regulations on the LFP website, La Liga is not only the top division. --MicroX (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The English language usage of the phrase is neither dictated nor directed by the LFP website, as the sources show. Knepflerle (talk) 20:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "La Liga" isn't exactly English either. --MicroX (talk) 23:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• ""La Liga" isn't exactly English either" - nonsense. What language are the sources above written in if not English? La Liga is what English speakers writing in English call the league. English is as English speakers do. Knepflerle (talk) 23:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I am an English speaker too, but just because I may introduce new words into the English language does not mean they are English.--MicroX (talk) 23:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• But when most media outlets use the term, as shown above, it's a little different. Knepflerle (talk) 23:51, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Well sometimes the media use short, pretty words for their stuff, like La Liga which technically isn't the name of the Primera División of the LFP. --MicroX (talk) 00:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• We use the names of things that our readers are likely to come across in references and the media, be they "short and pretty" or otherwise. That is the thrust of WP:NAME and its preference for common names. The proposed Spanish-English hybrid is not a name our readers are likely to have seen anywhere in the past, or are likely to find anywhere else in their future research. Knepflerle (talk) 09:33, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• According to WP:NAME, it should be Recognizable (La Liga), Easy to Find (La Liga), Precise (Primera Division), Concise (could be either), and Consistent (Primera Division). I propose Primera División of Spain. --MicroX (talk) 03:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support All should be moved including Spain's. --MicroX (talk) 03:00, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• That is not a rationale, and this is not a vote. Knepflerle (talk) 17:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Of course it is a vote. How else is are we, or perhaps an admin, supposed to know if someone supports or opposes this. Digirami (talk) 23:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• No. It is not a vote. It doesn't matter how many people support or oppose - what matters is the quality of the arguments and evidence presented. Please read WP:CONSENSUS#Community discussion and polls and WP:NOTDEMOCRACY - this is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and essential reading for all editors here. Knepflerle (talk) 01:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• This voting is a formality for the consensus already reached in the Wiki:Project's talk page. Digirami (talk) 03:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• No, read WP:NOTDEMOCRACY again - you still haven't got it yet. Votes don't matter, arguments and evidence do. Also take a look at WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY - we don't go through votes to "formalise" consensus. It doesn't matter if WT:FOOTY claim La Liga means something in English it does not, and it doesn't matter how many people come from WT:FOOTY and vote that it means something in English it does not - the evidence clearly shows you're wrong, and it's the truth which matters. Knepflerle (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "La Liga" isn't exactly English either. The Spanish top-flight football league is officially the Primera División, and that is the truth. It is erroneously called La Liga by some but Primera División is its official name.--MicroX (talk) 23:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• ""La Liga" isn't exactly English either" - nonsense. What language are the sources above written in if not English? La Liga is what English speakers writing in English call the league. English is as English speakers do.
• "It is erroneously called La Liga" - that is merely your opinion, but we are not here for linguistic prescriptivism. We record what English speakers use, and they use La Liga, not the cross-language hybrid suggested in the move request. Knepflerle (talk) 23:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - "La Liga" refers to the Liga de Fútbol Profesional, which comprises the Primera División and the Segunda División. Essentially, "La Liga" is analogous to The Football League, in that it is a league with multiple divisions. I also think that Spain's Primera División is the most common usage of the term, so La Liga should be moved to Primera División. I agree with the rest of the move requests. – PeeJay 08:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• ""La Liga" refers to the Liga de Fútbol Profesional, which comprises the Primera División and the Segunda División." - nonsense, there's ten sources above showing that this is completely untrue. Repeating this doesn't make it any more true. Knepflerle (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• It's painfully obvious that the top division in Spain is called Primera División. Not only does it mean "First Division" but just go look at articles like es:Primera División de España or es:Ligas de fútbol de España (or just look at the logo). Try stop using sources who obviously aren't aware of the situation. Another reason to have it on it's rightful name (instead of the wrong name that's come into usage): Should ALL other leagues be moved to "[Country] league", "[Country] football league" or "[Country] first division of football". Just taking the Eredivisie as example. You can probably find multiple sources calling it "the Dutch first division" or "the Dutch league", doesn't mean it's name we should use. chandler 17:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "Try stop using sources who obviously aren't aware of the situation." - I quoted UEFA, Sky Sports and ESPN - they don't know what the situation is? Hilarious. Knepflerle (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I notice that you're still citing Spanish wikipedia articles as sources for English usage(!), and asking us to take their word over evidence of actual English language usage. That just shows how wide of the mark you are. Knepflerle (talk) 20:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• You're playing on your team alone, the Spanish use is pretty obviously the correct usage. Usage in UEFA multiple times FIFA, Sky Sports, ESPN (clearly distinguishing Primera and Segunda in the league tables). The Spanish wiki is very good seeing as its from the language the league is native in, and again. Do you want all UEFA leagues who obviously aren't on "English common usage" names, seeing as they don't lie on "Russian First division" or "Austrian league"? "La Liga" comes from "La Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional", which includes both the Primera and the Segunda. This is blatantly obvious chandler 22:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The English language sources I provide tell you how the term is used in English. The Spanish wikipedia links you provide tell you how the term is used in Spanish. That is blatantly obvious. Knepflerle (talk) 23:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• He just provided English sources to support how they are used in English. How do you not see that? Digirami (talk) 00:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• ... and he also provided Spanish wikipedia sources which are irrelevant to English-language usage. Your constant misreading of my comments is incredibly tiring, Digirami. Knepflerle (talk) 09:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Your constant selective misrepresentation of other's statements is decreasing your ability to make credible (counter)arguments. Chandler provided excellent English sources in support of Primera Division. But then you say "The English language sources I provide tell you how the term is used in English", which shows that you either ignored his sources, or insinuated that his English sources do not provide proof that the term "Primera Division" in is English usage. Digirami (talk) 10:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• They are relevant to knowing what the actual name of the league is (File:Liga BBVA.png). You can't wiggle out of this fact and I don't see you requesting moves for all other leagues who lie on their correct names, seeing as they aren't the most common in English usages. chandler 09:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• They don't tell you what the league is commonly called in English though, which is the issue at hand - especially when it can be explicitly demonstrated that English use of the term (for the top division) is not the same as that given in the Spanish wikipedia. Official names in one language don't necessarily become common use in another, and it certainly hasn't in this case - so appealing to official use in a second language is secondary to checking what English speakers call it every day.
• As for other articles - one thing at a time! I have limited editing, an excessive amount of which I have squandered on this discussion already. Knepflerle (talk) 09:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The only thing you have been able to prove is that "La Liga" is used in English, but not the common usage. Digirami (talk) 10:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• "shows that you either ignored his sources, or insinuated that his English sources do not provide proof" utter rubbish that will convince nobody. The comment about my English sources says something about my English sources, the comment about chandler's Spanish sources says something about his Spanish sources. Drawing anything further is your own personal misinterpretation, as anyone reading this discussion will see. You'll get nowhere commenting on what you (incorrectly) think I mean, rather than on what I actually say. Knepflerle (talk) 11:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• There is no misinterpretation. You completely ignored his English sources by comparing your English sources with his Spanish sources as if chandler never provided valid English sources (which he did). That, or he bested you with his English sources and you have no counterpoint to that (or most of mine for that matter), so you choose to ignore it. Digirami (talk) 13:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Maybe we can rename the article to its official name Primera División and La Liga redirects to Primera División instead of the LFP. --MicroX (talk) 00:03, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Wouldn't the official name be "Primera Division de la Liga Nacional de Futbol Profesional"? Digirami (talk) 00:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Too long. --MicroX (talk) 00:36, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Additional comment - Another problem because of the incorrect usage of the name of this league is that every season article for the Primera now has La Liga in the title. I highly doubt this league was referred, or even remotely named, "La Liga" in 1929. But it's there, wrong for the whole world to see. Digirami (talk) 10:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• If we look through the edit history of the this article we can see it started out as the article for the whole Spanish football league system [11], but seems to have gone away and only focused on the first division of the LFP. chandler 11:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The change took place in late(?) 2006 according to the history. Digirami (talk) 13:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Final comment - Moving it to Primera División of Spain.--MicroX (talk) 03:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Bad idea. While you had no opposition, you also had no support (which would have been very useful for this league). Digirami (talk) 01:30, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - So if Knepflerle doesn't approve, it stays as La Liga? --MicroX (talk) 07:47, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Not necessarily - but it's the arguments and evidence which matter. Once you've stripped out the arguments based on prescriptivism (rather than recording actual usage), arguments based on the ambiguity of the term in the Spanish language use of the term (which demonstrably isn't true of the English-language usage of the term), and a small amount of complete bunkum that does not deserve the title of "argument" we're left with the following: use Primera División alone (which is seen in English, but is far too ambiguous), use Spanish Primera División or Primera División of Spain (unambiguous but rarely-used hybrids barely ever seen in English), or use La Liga (a recognisable term with verified widespread use in English).
• The best alternative in the style of the second options is Primera División (Spain) - i.e. with the country-name as a proper Wikipedia-style disambiguator. Using a proper disambiguator makes it clear this is not a part of the normal English-language name for the subject of the article, but is used here for convenience. But en.wp very rarely picks a title which needs disambiguation when there is a commonly-used one which doesn't - and it's hard to see the pressing need to do so here. Knepflerle (talk) 14:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Anyone favor the approach (with the (Country)) with the Latin American Primera Divisions?--MicroX (talk) 01:00, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Footy talk page, someone brought up that in the guidelines, disambiguating using parenthesis should be discourage when possible (I think it was point #3 of WP:NCDAB, but the wording of that point is odd). I believe that is why we choose Spanish Primera Division over Primera Division (Spain). I also think the parenthesis option will look a bit odd when it comes to the season articles.
• If we can find a way to dismbiguate without parenthesis, I'm for it. Digirami (talk) 01:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"disambiguating using parenthesis should be discourage when possible (I think it was point #3 of WP:NCDAB, but the wording of that point is odd)" - that's a clear misreading and misunderstanding of that point.

All WP:NCDAB is saying is that when a disambiguating word is used in parentheses, then it should not be an adjective. It does not say that parenthetical disambiguation should be avoided - this is quite obvious from points 1 and 2. There would be nothing wrong with using the country's name (a proper noun) as a disambiguator.

However, point 1 says "When there is another term... that is equally clear and unambiguous, that should be used.", and I still contend that La Liga meets that requirement. Knepflerle (talk) 09:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that people have been arguing that La Liga is an ambiguous term since it can refer to the whole league (1ra and 2da divisiones). Spanish Primera Division is a clear, precise, and unambiguous. Digirami (talk) 01:43, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might be ambiguous in Spanish, but it's not in English. I have pointed this out numerous times, and is demonstrated by the links I gave. This is a non-argument. Knepflerle (talk) 02:04, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you think about it, all you have found is that no prove exists on the internet.

Anyways, Spanish Primera Division is still a more precise and accurate title and is closer to the title we are trying to disambiguate it from: Primera Division. Digirami (talk) 03:47, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. I showed that the extrapolation from Spanish to English was wrong. In every instance, the term in English referred to the top division alone. Saying this is either ambiguous or inconclusive is wrong. Knepflerle (talk) 18:42, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm for of Country format because it won't look odd in the season articles. Best way to disambiguate without parenthesis as it will fit in prose. Unless we mimic the national football team articles, Mexico Primera Division. --MicroX (talk) 01:21, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no point designing a name "to fit in with prose" when it's a name practically no-one uses in English. Either use a common English term which fits into prose, like La Liga, or use link piping. Knepflerle (talk) 09:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I was referring to the Latin American Primera Divisions seeing as your arguments for keeping La Liga are fair enough. --MicroX (talk) 00:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I would be happy with La Liga staying here, and the Latin American leagues going to Primera División (country) titles. Knepflerle (talk) 02:04, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• But no one speaks that way in English. "de Country" is common in Spanish, but its direct translation in English is not. In English, we rarely, if ever, say "Serie A of Italy", "Premier League of England", or "Bundesliga of Germany", but rather "Italian Serie A", or "English Premier League", or "German Bundesliga". The most common way of disambiguating in speech and text in cases like this is using a denomic (spelling) adjective. Digirami (talk) 08:43, 5 November 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.