Talk:Horn peninsula

The entry should be restored
In my opinion, the entry should be restored, see RFD discussion. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:56, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

RFD discussion: January–March 2014
Looks like Horn + peninsula to me. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 22:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I vote to keep since it isn;t used as an sop in the source provided. Pass a Method (talk) 08:28, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * In the entry it's with an extra capital letter. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:26, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that it is SOP in the source provided - do you have an argument to the contrary? —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 14:58, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe it was worded as such to distinguish with other place-names with "horn" in their name; nonetheless i don't feel strongly about this entry, so do what you feel is best. Pass a Method (talk) 02:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:15, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as sum of parts. "peninsula" is in lowercase and not a part of a proper name. The quotations currently present in the entry: "... throughout the whole Horn peninsula". An aside, a search that could be used for attestation in RFV: . --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:25, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I missed this discussion. This entry should be restored and kept. It's idiomatic. "Horn" doesn't mean "Horn peninsula". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:30, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * It appears that it does, according to Wiktionary. Horn = “Of or pertaining to the Horn of Africa”; Horn of Africa = “A peninsula in East Africa that juts for hundreds of kilometers into the Arabian Sea.” —Michael Z. 2014-03-27 02:46 z 


 * It's either Horn of Africa or Horn peninsula but not just Horn in the peninsula sense, unless someone uses it colloquially. In any case, nominative case is the normal term, nominative is its abbreviation (just an example). Horn peninsula is a word with a full meaning word in its shortest form (Horn of Africa being a synonym). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:52, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I can’t make any sense of that at all.


 * Google Books has 88,000 instances of “around the Horn” but only 165 of “around the Horn of Africa.” —Michael Z. 2014-03-27 15:24 z 


 * For the record, 88k is Google's guesstimate of how many books use "around the Horn", but if you page through to the end, you'll find there are only 82 and a third pages of results (=only 823 books). And many of those are irrelevant, either because they concern the US show, or literal horns, or other geographic Horns (I had forgotten there were any besides the African one):
 * 2006, Philip R. Scott, Sheep Medicine ISBN 1840765364, page 260:
 * Headflies can present a major problem during the summer months in horned sheep grazed near woodland. The muscid fly Hydrotea irritans causes considerable irritation around the horn base during feeding, ...
 * 2009, Charles F. Gritzner, ‎Linnea C. Swanson, Panama ISBN 1438105290, page 76:
 * The trip around the Horn (the southern tip of South America) adds about 8,000 miles (12,900 kilometers) to a journey between the east and west coasts of the United States.
 * Nonetheless, Michael is right that the Horn of Africa is quite commonly designated simply the "Horn". - -sche (discuss) 22:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, I agree with the "Horn" designation but to me it's still too casual (like States or in reference to USA and USSR) and ambiguous like "the Gulf" (Persian Gulf) but I can remove rfv for Horn. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I have restored the entry as per CFI. The discussion can continue. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:48, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unlike "Horn of Africa" (which, despite the existence of "Horn", almost certainly passes the "in a jiffy" test), this seems SOP to me. - -sche (discuss) 05:17, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as sum-of-parts. —Michael Z. 2014-03-27 15:24 z 


 * SoP argument is invalid for place names. They are just names, SoP or not. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * To some extent, we're talking past each other: you don't think SOP is a valid argument, because you think this is a placename. But my (and possibly Michael's) argument is that "Horn peninsula" is not a placename any more than "island of Cuba" or "nation of Russia", it's a SOP description of the place. - -sche (discuss) 22:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I know what you mean but I disagree. "Horn peninsula" is no different from Isle of Man or Isle of Wight, even if both can be referred to as Man or Wight casually. "nation of ..." is hardly used but Russian Federation is a co-official name of Russia, even if it's SoP. We have a big list of "... island(s)" type of islands kept but no "island of ...". Baffin Island is clearly an island name, unlike Baffin, Horn, same with peninsulas. Only some people will know that Kola (Kola Peninsula) is a peninsula in the north of Russia? There's no other name for it in Russian but Ко́льский полуо́стров. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * It’s not like any of those. The proper name of this thing is “the Horn.” It isn’t a legal or standardized name. And it isn’t influenced by Russian.


 * Why are you arguing this? Can you even find three quotations using this term!? —Michael Z. 2014-03-28 06:04 z 


 * I didn't say it's influenced by Russian, it's only called in Russian. It's attestable, even if I haven't done it - "Horn peninsula" in Google Books]. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You obviously haven't looked at any of the hits: there isn't a single one that refers to the Horn of Africa. There's a Horn Peninsula in Ireland, another one in Lake Ontario, Canada, Cape Horn on the southern tip of South America, the Golden Horn peninsula in Turkey, and a number of hyphenation artifacts and sentences ending in "horn" followed by sentences starting with "peninsula". Personal opinions about place names are irrelevant, because this isn't a place name any more than "the Russian country" is. If you're trying to make a test case out of this one, you've chosen the worst possible example, because there's absolutely nothing there. Nothing. Zilch. Bupkis. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:53, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * In case I wasn't clear enough: this wouldn't survive rfv because there isn't a single example of usage to be found in Google Books or Google Groups. The only cite in the entry is a comment posted to a blog . It may very well be the only non-wiki usage anywhere at all. With all the other Horn peninsulas out there, we may need to move this to the Horn peninsula of Africa (equally (un-)attested, and no more SOP than the current form) just to avoid confusion. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:33, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * @MZajac: re: "around the Horn". I would expect an overwhelming share of uses of "around the Horn" to refer to "Cape Horn" in far southern South America. It is a particularly arduous trip ("Roaring 40s") and was more so for sailing ships. DCDuring TALK 16:26, 28 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Oops, you are quite right. Perhaps Horn requires more definitions. Too bad these can’t be listed as subsenses of horn 13. —Michael Z. 2014-03-29 15:42 z 


 * I agree with the deletion now. Indeed, it's not attestable in this sense. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:51, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * |from|at|below|toward|from+the+horn%22+America|Atlantic|Pacific|Magellan|Argentina|%22Tierra+del+fuego%22+-%22horn+of+africa%22&oq=%22to|from|at|below|toward|from+the+horn%22+America|Atlantic|Pacific|Magellan|Argentina|%22Tierra+del+fuego%22+-%22horn+of+africa%22&gs_l=serp.3...5632.5657.0.6380.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1c.1.38.serp..2.0.0.vAzRlLXXQPI This Google Books search seems to contain enough references to [[Horn] referring to Cape Horn distinct from around the Horn, though I haven't excluded those uses that are shortly preceded by Cape Horn. DCDuring TALK 18:26, 29 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Per the above discussion, the entry has been re-deleted. RFD-failed as both SOP and nonexistent. - -sche (discuss) 20:51, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Horn region
Similarly. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 23:31, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep; There are dozens of sources in Usenet where it is used as a proper noun. Pass a Method (talk) 08:28, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Is that necessarily a keep reason, though? For example North Leeds, South Leeds are proper nouns but entirely predictable from the sum of their parts. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:27, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Once again, i don't feel strongly about whether its kept or not. However the sources i added appear to use it as an encompassing name in the same way the Balkans is treated. Pass a Method (talk) 02:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Even if they do, how does that make it idiomatic? Balkans region is well attested, but it's also SOP. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 14:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:15, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as sum of parts. "region" is in lowercase and not a part of a proper name. The quotations currently present in the entry: "... and the entire Greater Horn region of Africa", "... is great for the whole Horn region", "... the famine that’s plaguing Ethiopia and the Horn region", "...  they cause untold suffering in the Horn region".  An aside, a search that could be used for attestation in RFV: . --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:25, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know about Horn region right now but I have requested restoration of Horn peninsula above, which didn't get enough attention and was deleted by you (not blaming you for the deletion, judging by how it's been here). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * The entry has already been deleted, but because discussion of the preceding entry has been re-opened and I am commenting on it, I will also note that I think this entry deserved deletion. - -sche (discuss) 05:17, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

RFV discussion: March 2014
I ask for attestation. Please consider placing the attesting quotations at Citations:Horn peninsula, since this appears unattestable. . --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:43, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It would've been easier if the term was RFVed, not RFDed. It's unattestable, indeed. Delete. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 08:27, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Not sure why you are voting. This can run the normal RFV course based on presentation of evidence, can't it? --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:57, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It was deleted, I have restored it, now I've changed my mind, since it seems unattestable. It can run its course but it may be a waste of time in this instance. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 09:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)