Talk:Cádiz

Spain High‑importance

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Phoenicia Low‑importance

	Phoenicia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Phoenicia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Phoenicia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.PhoeniciaWikipedia:WikiProject PhoeniciaTemplate:WikiProject PhoeniciaPhoenicia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Most ancient in the western Mediterranean?

It is regarded as the most ancient still existing city in the western Mediterranean.

Is this correct? Normally one thinks of the strait of Gibraltar as separating the Mediterranean from the Atlantic Ocean. And Cadiz is situated west of Gibraltar.

Sebastjan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.168.172.145 (talk) 11:00, 15 June 2003 (UTC)[reply]

The map in the Spain article certainly shows it clearly as being in the North Atlantic. In any case, I would dispute the description of it as the "most ancient". Deb 11:08, 15 June 2003 (UTC)[reply]

Following on from this, stating that Cadiz is the oldest city in Europe is simply false. The article gives a founding date of 1200BC, which is not very ancient. Take the following from the article on Athens, for example:

"The history of Athens is the longest of any city in Europe: Athens has been continuously inhabited for at least 3,000 years" and "The Acropolis of Athens was inhabited from Neolithic times." Neolithic, i.e. stone age!

Or take into account information from the article on Korinthos in Greece: "The city was founded in the Neolithic Age, circa 6000 BC."

Don't get me wrong, Cadiz is a beautiful city with a lot of history, but it certainly isn't the oldest city in Europe :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.227.176.34 (talk) 15:30, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article says "in Western Europe", Greece is south-east Europe.--Alesis69 02:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but if you look at the Western Europe article, you'll se that either Greece is part of Western Europe (following the geopolitical, post-Cold War definition), or Spain is not in Western Europe (following other definitions, it is in Southern Europe or Southern-Western Europe).

I therefore take the freedom to reword the definition. --Cyclopia (talk) 16:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The line is, "in the western Mediterranean," not "in Western Europe." Greece is not in the western Mediterranean. At the same time, Cadiz is not in (or on) the Mediterranean at all; rather, it lies on the Gulf of Cadiz, part of the Atlantic Ocean. Perhaps the original writer was thinking culturally, rather than in strict cartographical terms.128.111.95.15 (talk) 19:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)korishel[reply]

I do not see the problem with the definition. The definition here is a cultural and geographical one, not a political one. The is probably the first urban culture in Europe, but it is also closely related to the middle east cultures. Outside that sphere, a foundation date of 1200 BC is certainly ancient, as we are not talking about human presence, but the fundation of the city.

Also, I would dispute this "Traditionally, its founding is dated to 1104 BC[4] although no archaeological strata on the site can be dated earlier than the ninth century" when in the same article we have a pic of a roman theatre and a phoenician sarcophagus... Should not it be ninth century BC? Leirus (talk) 13:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)LeirusLeirus[reply]

If you check List of cities by time of continuous habitation, with the title of oldest city in the Iberian Peninsula for Cadiz, this title contradicts with Lisbon, continuously inhabited since 1200 BC, 1 century older than Cadiz (started in 1100 BC). But the identity of being "oldest city" (there's even a title of "oldest city in Europe" for Cadiz) seems to stuck historically --Rochelimit (talk) 21:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plural name

I heard that the fact that the Greek and Roman names (Gadeira and Gades) are plural point to being several nuclei.--Error 01:56, 20 February 2004 (UTC)[reply]

In Geographica, by Strabo, two nuclei are mentioned by name "As for their city, the one they lived in at first was very small indeed, but Balbus of Gades, who gained the honour of a triumph, founded another for them, which they call "Nea";and the city which is composed of the two they call "Didyme". (Book III chapter 5 pag 131). Leirus (talk) 13:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)LeirusLeirus[reply]

Nickname

The city of Cádiz is usually refered as "la tacita de plata" (the little silver cup). Can this be considered a nickname? --surueña 08:41, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it can. Cádiz is usually named in that way and "Cái" as well, but that second name is more referred to Cádiz people's pronunciation than a real nickname. --Peejayem 08:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date of Christopher Columbus's 2nd journey from Cadiz

The Cadiz page said 1495, but the Christopher Columbus page said 1493. I've made the bold assumption that more people would be checking the accuracy of the Columbus page, and changed the Cadiz page to 1493. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.230.252.1 (talk) 17:57, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Why is this page under Cádiz and not the more common English spelling of Cadiz? Possibly the four most common usages for the city in English documents are Christopher Columbus setting sail for the new world, Drake's singing of the king of Spain's beard, the fleet that sailed to its doom at Trafalgar, and Wellington's Siege of Cadiz. The final usage would be modern usage as a travel destination but even under that the word is usually spelt Cadiz --Philip Baird Shearer 00:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Because Cadiz is incorrect. "Cadiz" puts the accent on the second syllable when pronounced in Spanish. The accent must be retained to make the pronunciation accurate. The name is CAH-diz, not ca-DEEZ. -Scm83x 00:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as "incorrect" in English there is only usage. Besides most native English speakers ignore funny foreign squiggles over letters even when they are present. The spelling of a name in English often has little to do with how it pronounced. For example Southwark, Worcester and Mousehole. I think that first line of the article should start "Cadiz (Spanish:Cádiz)" which would be more informative than the current introduction and cover your point --Philip Baird Shearer 01:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First, we should remember that there still exists a redirect to Cádiz from Cadiz, which is a similar custom for most article titles including accents. It's convention on Wikipedia to list the actual name of the location in Spanish - see Málaga, Ciudad Juárez, Michoacán, and Nuevo León, to name a few. When I spent a few months in Cádiz this past summer, I noticed that all English-speakers, whether American or British, tended to pronounce Cádiz without the accent. Spanish word pronunciation is often butchered; for example, here in Austin, Texas, we pronounce the local street Guadalupe as "Gwa-dah-loop," with the emphasis on the first syllable, and a very American, hard "d" sound. Therein lies the dilemma, which I'm glad you brought up, as I hadn't even thought of it before.

Looking at other languages, we still see traces of this problem. In articles dealing with Russia, for example, of course we refer to the Federal Assembly of Russia like I just did, rather than as Федеральное Собрание. We rarely, if ever, see articles that keep the Cyrillic spellings. On the other hand, when we have articles in languages that keep the same, or at least a similar, alphabet, we often preserve the original spellings. For example, in Romanian articles (a Romance language), we see Traian Băsescu. I'll admit that I don't even know that the thing above the 'a' is called, so I probably wouldn't be quick to include it when I'm writing his name.

Technically, according to the Wikipedia manual of style, all foreign words should be italicized, i.e., Cádiz. On the other hand, words that have passed into English should not be, i.e., Cadiz. However, it's difficult to determine whether a Spanish place name has fallen into English usage. For example, in the United States, we never refer to Mexico City (no accent) as México D.F. In another case, some place like Nuevo León will often be pronounced correctly, though people tend to forget to write accents. Finally, for a place like Yucatán, pretty much everyone butchers both pronunciation and spelling.

It seems mostly like a debate about whether the Spanish place name has fallen into common usage in the English language. This, of course, varies widely among English-speakers themselves; many Texans may vacation in the Anglicized Spanish place-names in the Southwest U.S., while British citizens more often holiday in Spain itself, and everybody pronounces it differently - presenting the still unresolved issue between whether we should following American or British conventions.

As a result, I'd vote to keep the Cádiz article as it is, or be ready to toe the line between Anglicized and non-Anglicized and prepare to overhaul our entire collection of articles with foreign people and place names. It's not a matter of "correct pronounciation," but, rather, simply to what degree we need to preserve foreign spellings. Perhaps we include the foreign spelling unless we simply can't read it? I can't give a straight answer. -Rebelguys2 03:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just because Spanish and English use the Latin alphabet doesn't mean that articles should have a Spanish title. Would you have an article titled "北京" and have "Beijing" redirect to that? If you follow the example on other language wikipedias, especially non-latin alphabets languages, you will see that the article name should be Cadiz, and the first line of the text should be:

Cadiz (Spanish: Cádiz) is a coastal city in...

and the name of the city above the infobox should be be Cadiz, Spain, or at least, keeping in line with Spanish usage, be Cádiz, España? 218.102.71.16 11:26, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You make a good point. However, Wikipedia is currently unstandardized when it comes to this subject; I'd leave things be and bring it up through an official channel. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 22:58, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cádiz, España is fine for the Spanish version of Wikipedia but in English it won't work. E Jaffe 13:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cádiz is simply wrong in English. Not only is the á not an English letter but the stress in English is on the i. --Henrygb 18:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

so can we fix this? what would happen if I translated all the Spanglish and this page to Cadiz? Btw, there's this whole section of text that becomes visible once you go to edit, this text isn't barely legible, and i'm just wondering why it's there, and if needs to be fixed. The Jackal God 01:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, after all the discussion on this topic, Cadiz is still spelled wrong. It still has that little squiggle above the "a". Why don't we just re-spell all the words in English and convert them to other languages and get it over with? Then, we can dispense with the English version of Wikipedia, and everyone will be content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.109.106 (talk) 02:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly remember to sign your posts.

Someone fixed the namespace but then forgot to fix the first line. Done. —

Llywelyn II

15:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cadiz: Ithaca

Homer describes Ithaca as "amphialos" which means: "with a sea on each side"; A perfect description for a place between the Mediterranean and the Atlantic.

Also, the situation described by Homer perfectly matches with how this region was 3200 years ago: the Guadalete delta not yet turned into land and Ithaca being the most westerly situated island but yet closest to the mainland. You can find a map on page 137 of Iman Wilkens latest book; the 2005 edition.

Furthermore, there are other places in the region that sound Homeric: Gerena (pronounced Gerenia) (Nestor!) Pylos, now Pilas, Sparta, now Esparteros mountain, Sidon, now Medina Sidonia (town of Sidon). 212.123.163.102 07:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose the average Wikipedia reader also deciphers "Eratosth. ap. Steph. B. s. v." as "(lost work of) Eratosthenes as quoted by Stephanus of Byzantium, under the entry for Gadeira" just as we all do... --Wetman 18:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC):[reply]

I have no idea what are those historical names foing in the intro section. They should be moved to a more suitable location, further down, in my opinion. --Asterion^talk 19:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is cute, but you are aware there actual is a real place really called Ithaca, right? Also between two (different) seas? (Also, the Atlantic wasn't a 'sea' – the Greeks thought of it as the World Ocean/River.) —

Llywelyn II

15:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Numismatics?

Pardon me, but I don't see exactly how this articel is related to the subject or why that thing is on top of the talk page. 68.39.174.238 01:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neither do I. I asked the relationship in the wikiproject´s page with no answer: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Numismatics#C.C3.A1diz.3F--Garcilaso 12:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I actually reverted a bot adding the tag a few months ago, but I noticed that the article is in Category:Ancient mints. That's why it's automatically been tagged for WikiProject Numismatics. It's not really expounded on in the article, but, hey, that's what Wikiproject coordination is for. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 17:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Camarón de la Isla

Someone please include a reference to Camarón de la Isla, who's birthplace is Cádiz (or Cadiz =). He was the most famous and influential Flamenco singer. A lot of his songs are about Cadiz too. Keep up the good work — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.33.144.68 (talk) 01:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evitavired: I think that he was born in San Fernando, which is just up the coast. Great singer, I agree. But, the article should probabably link in from the page relating to the province of Cadiz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evitavired (talk • contribs) 22:07, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-organised landmarks

--Evitavired I have re-organised landmarks into Landmark bulidings, plazas, city wall, roman cadiz and others: hopefully, this is useful and over time we can add in other important features such as the Royal Prison for the landmark buildings, and castillo santa catalina, castillo san sebastian, parque genoves and the alameda for the city walls. Does anyone else think that the landmarks section should feature just below the history section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.92.93 (talk) 22:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Videos on YouTube

--Evitavired There are some excellent videos of Cadiz on You Tube. I have attached links to three, which I believe really add something to the page. I'm not sure whether this is in accordance with Wikipedia policy, and so they may be deleted: it would be a shame if they are though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.92.93 (talk) 21:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but we cannot link from YouTube. If you can find the same promotional videos from the original source (e.g. Andalusia Tourist Office) and they have made these available online, you could post that link instead. At it stands, it is not possible to link to copyrighted content posted without consent from the rights owner. Thanks, --Asterion^talk 21:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page organisation: Landmark Buildings and Squares

--Evitavired I think that the Cadiz Old Town can be characterised by its narrow streets, its squares and the City walls which border the atlantic. Most (but not all) of the principal landmarks are either in a square or form part of the City walls and fortifications. I have re-organised the landmarks section so that each of the principal squares is covered and where a landmark building is situated in that square it is described at that point. I have done the same for the City walls in relation to the castles, gates and baulaurtes. I have then added on a further section for other landmarks. There are many things still to add, such as the Parque Genoves, the Royal Prison and several of the churches, and I will try to get to these in due course. I have also added several entries already. Does anybody else have any thoughts on this approach? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evitavired (talk • contribs) 13:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grotto Santa Cueva

I have a red link for a church in the Grotto Santa Cueva where Joseph Haydn's The Seven Last Words of Christ was first performed in 1787. Is this place still there? Is there an an article for it? Thanks. DavidRF (talk) 07:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Population and demographic trends

The decline in population is atributed to (excuse the para-phrasing) 'a lack of high rise housing', 'a new national law governing coastal development that thwarts the possibility of reclaiming land from the sea' and 'the highest unemployement rate in Spain', but no references are given. I think the points listed above (particular geographic situation, laws governing coastal development in spain, one of the highest rates of unemployment in Spain) can all be described (with references) without having to make a link to the population statistics or make statements like'Replacement of these old buildings with high-density apartment projects would allow Cádiz to sustain a higher population.'. Does anyone agree that this section has alot of nonfactual content (politely put)? How does this work, should i go ahead and edit it? Lizard1976 (talk) 17:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They speak Spanish

cadiz is a city in spain and the people that is living there....the speak spanish--by:crystal t. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crystal talbert (talk • contribs) 21:50, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Local pronunciation of Cadiz is needed

The local pronunciation of Cadiz is NOT the traditional Spanish one of 'ka-diθ", it is more like kaj. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.123.242.201 (talk) 16:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign yr posts.

We've got a local pronunciation now, but actually two. It seems that one is the general Andalucian accent and the other the local Caditan one (see, eg, the comment here), but we need some real sources so we can be more specific. —

Llywelyn II

15:12, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moorish rule

Why is there such a short mention of Moorish rule which lasted 400 years? I really don't think a single sentence will suffice for such an extensive and pivotal portion of the history of Cadiz and of Andalusia, and Spain itself. Those who are knowledgeable of the topic or have access to sources PLEASE attempt to expand on this. Much has been made of Cadiz' Roman history, yet nothing of its equally long history under Moorish rule except a dismissive line about how it was "finally reconquered". Disgraceful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.52.17 (talk) 23:54, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We could certainly use it, but its history under Roman rule is more important and connected to the people living there now so 'disgraceful' is laying it on a bit thick. Arabic's hard and, while some of the original sources have been translated into English, it's not as common to have good critical commentary alongside making sense of it all. But, yes, someone please add more as you find it. —

Llywelyn II

02:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

El Dorado Hills connection

Someone seems to have inserted a joke reference to the layout of Cadiz being planned after a suburb of Sacramento, California, which is totally ridiculous. I would just delete it but I don't edit much these days and wanted to bring this up with the group first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.103.148.141 (talk) 22:44, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Idol of Cadiz

How is there no mention of the Idol of Cadiz? The gold plated bronze statue built by Phoenicians, destroyed by the Moors; standing 180 feet high for more than 1000 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.74.191.229 (talk) 11:51, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly sign your posts.

Added, with sources, although it was (almost) certainly not Phoenician since it was entirely omitted by every source in classical antiquity. It is interesting that it seems to have been a Sudanese African god (possibly with Poseidon's trident) but it really needs its own page (with redirects from Sanam Qadis and Salamcadis) to hold all the different versions of the legends. Just mentioned the main ones here. —

Llywelyn II

02:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. This kind of idol is usually associated with Tartessian divinities. Here's some more info: http://www.museosdeandalucia.es/cultura/museos/MCA/index.jsp?redirect=S2_3_1_1.jsp&idpieza=90&pagina=1 124.35.178.162 (talk) 05:13, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The author of Kitdbu-l-Ja'rafiyah has furnished us with details concerning the tower of Qadis. We shall quote his own words. "In this city," he says, (meaning Qadis) "there formerly stood a square tower, upwards of one hundred cubits high, and built of large blocks of stone, admirably placed one on the top of another, and fastened together by hooks of brass. On the top of the tower was a square pedestal of white marble, measuring four spans, and on it a statue representing a human being, so admirably executed in form, proportions, and face, that it looked more like a living man than an inanimate block. His face was turned towards the Western Sea; he had his back to the north; the left arm extended, and the fingers closed, with the exception of the forefinger, which he held in a horizontal position, pointing towards the mouth of that sea which issues out of the Ocean, and lies between Tangiers and Tarifa, being known by the name of Bahru-z-zokak (the Madiq Jabal Tariq). His right arm was close to the body, as if holding his garments tightly, and in the right hand he bore a stick, with which he pointed towards the sea. Some authors pretend that what he held were keys, but it is a mis-statement; I saw the idol often, and could never discover any thing else but the above mentioned stick, which he held in his right hand in a vertical position, and somewhat raised from the ground; besides, I am assured by the testimony of trustworthy people, who were present or assisted at the pulling down of this idol, that it was a short stick, of about twelve spans in length, having at the end some teeth like a curry-comb. Who was the builder of this tower, with the idol on the top, does not sufficiently appear. Mes'udi, in his 'Golden Meadows,' attributes its construction to al-Jabbar, the same who built the seven idols in the country of Zinj, which are one in sight of the other: but the most probable option seems to be that it was built by some of the ancient kings of al-Andalus to serve as a guide to navigators, from the fact of the idol having his left arm extended towards the Bahru-z-zokak (straits), and pointing to the mouth, as if he was showing the way. There were not wanting people who thought this idol to be made of pure gold; for whenever the rising or setting sun fell on the statue it sent forth rays of light, and shone in the brightest hues like the collar of a ring-dove, blue being the color which prevailed. Thus placed on the top of the tower the idol was like a signal for the Muslim navigators to go in and out of the Ocean, and whoever wanted to sail from any port in the Mediterranean to places in al-Maghreb, such as Lisbon, and others, had only to approach the tower, and then put up the sails, and make for the port whither they wished to go, whether Sale, Anfa, or any other in the western coast of Africa. When in after times this idol was pulled down, it ceased of course to be a signal for navigators: its demolition happened thus. In the year 540, at the beginning of the second civil war, 'Ali bin 'Isa bin Maymun, who was Admiral of the Fleet, revolted at Qadis, and declared himself independent. Having heard the inhabitants say that the idol on the top of the tower was made of pure gold, his cupidity was raised, and he gave orders for its immediate removal. The statue was found to be made of brass, covered only with a thin coat of gold, which, when removed, produced twelve thousand gold dinars. It is a general opinion among Andalusian and African Muslims that this idol exercised a sort of spell over the sea, but that the charm ceased the moment it was thrown down. They account for it in the following manner. There used once to be in the Ocean some large vessels which the Andalusians called karakir, provided with a square sail in front, and another behind; they were manned by a nation called Majus, people of great strength, determination, and much practice in navigation, and who at their landing on the coasts destroyed every thing with fire and sword, and committed unheard-of ravages and cruelties, so that at their appearance the inhabitants fled with their valuables to the mountains, and the whole coast was depopulated. The invasions of these barbarians were periodical—they took place every six or seven years; the number of their vessels was never less than forty, it sometimes amounted to a hundred; they devoured any one they found on the sea. The tower that I have described was known to them, and, following the direction pointed at by the idol, they were enabled to make at all times for the mouth of the straits, and enter the Mediterranean, ravage the coast of al-Andalus, and the islands close to it, sometimes carrying their depredations as far as the coasts of Syria. But when the idol was destroyed by the command of 'Ali bin Maymun, as I have already stated, no more was heard of these people, nor were their karakir (vessels) seen in these seas, with the exception of two that were wrecked on the coast, one at Marsu-l-Majus (the port of the Majus), and the other close to the promontory of al-Aghar."--MuslimKnight786 (talk) 21:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Well, from the conversation above, it took some doing, but we finally got this at the English common name. Yay, us. Now the rest of the name stuff.

I'm normally all in favor of lumping the foreign names into the first line and letting Wiktionary handle pronunciation, but this page seems special.

The intro sentence was atrocious and the name in various languages was then copied two more times (once in the name section and again in the history section). Go back through the MOS if you don't believe me, but you really don't include all the foreign text if it's already clearly presented elsewhere on the page. It's just needless at that point. (Someone could punch up a table, I suppose, but the current name section seems fine.)

The English pronunciations are the real killer, though. I got one reliable source but it just gave out a list. I'm not sure there are even standard American and British ways of saying this place: younger Brits probably copy "Ibeetha" and older ones something like "Kahdeez" and in America it varies just between Kentucky and Ohio. I found this and it seems pretty interesting (the poems by Edward Lear and Auden rhyming it with "ladies" and "Mercedes" like they were from Kentucky, especially) but we need a more reliable (current) source to use any of it.

We could also use something that explains that /kai/ is actually the local pronunciation and /kath-is/ is just the general Andalucian one, if that's true. — $Llywelyn II$ 15:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you people just moving articles back and forth in order to boost your edit count? Is it supposed to impress someone? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 21:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ENGVAR

Per Engvar, this edit established the usage as American English and that should kindly be maintained. — $Llywelyn II$ 17:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Frommers and Lonely Planet

Noting that Frommers and Lonely Planet spell the city Cádiz, is it still true that "Cadiz" in modern Spanish context is an exonym?

Cádiz Málaga Spain OR Spanish -Cadiz -Malaga since 2000 gets 3,900 English Books, but interestingly 253 books spell Málaga with an accent but Cádiz without. That's 10% of sources with Spanish fonts that treat Cadiz as an exonym. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cadiz → Cádiz – Frommers has moved from Cadiz (2007) to Cádiz (2012). That might sound like a strange rationale for a move, but 90% of English sources with full fonts since 2000 are treating the city as an endonym "Cádiz" rather than having an English exonym "Cadiz". Although Cádiz harbour was where Sir Francis Drake "singed the king of Spain's beard" in 1587, and 10 years later the British landed and burnt the city to the ground in 1596, it was never a British possession and, whether this is a factor or not, has never had an "English name." Also WP:AT consistency with Province of Cádiz. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Mexico, Peru, Aragon and other well-known Spanish place names that have been established in English without the accent marks. This city has an English pronunciation distinct from the Spanish, and the orthography reflects that. Dohn joe (talk) 17:03, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Those are countries (Aragon was at least), this is a city - all Spanish cities on en.wp are fully spelled (I don't know of any exceptions except this one) - compare "He survived the English attack on Cádiz and secretly returned to Peru in 1598." or "Don José Sáenz de Santa María, that distinguished member of Cádiz's enlightened community, was not from Spain but from Mexico, or rather from New Spain". Some evidence will be needed to argue that 90% of English sources are wrong. As for pronunciation Britannica article "Cádiz" gives no hint that there is an "English pronunciation," and Frommers 2012 says "Cádiz (pronounced “Cah-deeth”) was founded, according to legend, by Hercules himself some 3,000 years ago." In ictu oculi (talk) 20:29, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: It is about time that Wikipedia caught up with reality, rather than perpetuating out of date spellings that date back to when typewriters did not have accent symbols. In ictu oculi argues the case for a move well. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As far as I know, there's only one Spanish city with an actual exonym, and that's Seville/a. (And San Sebastian? That one I do think should be without the accent...) Anyway, I can see dropping the accent from a city like Barcelona (if it had one) since we'd have tons of English-language sources that do, but from a city with as little a footprint in the English language as Cadiz? Let's keep it. Red Slash 02:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support; more accurate spelling. bobrayner (talk) 23:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

When this comes up again, oppose. There are far worse offenders (including almost every Vietnamese article in the encyclopedia), but this isn't the actual WP:ENGLISH form of the name which is what we should be using. I.i.c. was kind enough to provide links and justifications for xer points, but they just serve to show the numbers were so cherry picked as to be labelled marasquino. A full 10% of sources using Cadiz even when they bother to accent Malaga doesn't speak to the unaccented form being uncommon, let alone "only 10% of English sources with full fonts"; it speaks to it being so very common that even sources preferring endonyms know to avoid it (at least as of 2013). Meanwhile, the overarching policy for Wikipedia pages is explicitly to support English exonyms regardless of local preferences.

Obviously willing to defer if there's an overarching policy on Spanish names (like the Vietnamese ones) but that really just means that I should take the argument to the relevant policy board instead of bothering this article's talk page. It's still a local consensus trying to avoid the more HELPFUL use of WP:COMMON names in favor of the WP:WRONG version. Every page that does something like this just pushes us one step closer to having to use pinyin tones for any Chinese word or name on every page in the encyclopedia.

Also, fwiw, BDD may have noticed the very many votes against this name in the discussion above but doesn't seem to have indicated taking them into account. — LlywelynII 11:53, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lol

"More recently, some English speakers hypercorrect and attempt to employ the Spanish lisp"

What a retarded piece of information. What is "the Spanish lisp"? A lisp is "a speech impediment in which a person misarticulates sibilants ([s], [z], [ts], [dz]), ([ʃ], [ʒ], [tʃ], [dʒ]).". How is the Spanish sound /θ/ misarticulated in that name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.146.69.224 (talk) 19:20, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First, Dude, "retarded" is not the preferred nomenclature. Second, if you were actually curious, we have an article on the Spanish lisp and you can read up on it. Third, there's nothing wrong with the sound /θ/ in and of itself, but the Spanish use of it in place of every sibilant in their language is definitionally lisping. — LlywelynII 09:43, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You should have taken your own advice and read the article you've linked yourself. The "Spanish lisp" is an urban legend. Spanish speakers can generally pronounce [s] perfectly well. Only the ceceo found in a few places in southern Spain even approaches a "lisp", and is heavily stigmatised. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cádiz

Cádiz is from Arabic قادس (Qādis), from Latin Gades Bompanigcc (talk) 08:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, Moors just took Latin name? Why is this comment here? Boo Boo (talk) 01:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]