Talk:Maastricht Formation

RFD discussion: March 2020–February 2021
I'm thinking we probably don't want names of formations... it's rather encyclopaedic, even more so than geographic names. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 23:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. I’d be in favour of keeping these if they were true proper nouns, but in Dutch this is Formatie van Maastricht, in French Formation de Maastricht and in German Maastricht-Formation. Next to compounds with formation, there are basins (like the Michigan Basin), faults (like the Alpine Fault), groups (like the Areado Group), rifts (like the Asunción Rift), and so on. It is a bit arbitrary whether the classifier is capitalized; one also finds Maastricht formation. Also, why limit such entities to geology; what about politics (Maastricht Treaty, Connecticut Compromise) and events (Dixon Bridge Disaster, Ludlow Massacre, Wanpaoshan Incident, ...)? --Lambiam 12:04, 25 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - Dentonius (my politics | talk) 14:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per Lambiam. - -sche (discuss) 07:55, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Usually I'm all in favor of place names and the like which can have quite opaque origins, but even the etymology section here hardly adds anything. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 15:49, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  17:55, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * RFD-deleted &mdash; surjection &lang;??&rang; 16:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)