Talk:Santa Cruz (city, Bolivia)

Sources & Copyright
How adequate would it be to use a source like Bolivia Web? Would it be considered copyright inflingement even if we rephrase it?


 * You cannot copy or even make an unauthorized derivative work (i.e. transform the text) from a copyrighted website. The information contained in those sites, however, is not copyrighted and you can use them as a source for research as long as you create your own (different, original) text to be licensed under the attribution-share alike licence. -- (WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 13:44, 26 November 2006 (EST)

Move to Santa Cruz de la Sierra
Wikipedia uses the title Santa Cruz de la Sierra. This would also avoid our current, awkward disambiguation for the title of the article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 03:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)


 * . I too favour Wikipedia's title. -- SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 08:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC)


 * But is it good to disambiguate the city's name by including a longer official name, if no-one but the government uses it? Wouldn't that be like calling Bangkok "Krung Thep Maha Nakhon", New York City "City of New York" and Washington, DC "Washington, District of Columbia"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:55, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia's principle is to also use (same with eswiki on ), so it would be no different if we also adopted the name. Plus, don't we also use Santiago de Chile even though almost everyone uses Santiago?  SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 09:01, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think Santa Cruz de la Sierra is becoming commonly used. For example, Google Maps uses the full name, as do several other travel guides and travel websites such as AirB&B. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 15:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * We may be making a mistake with Santiago, given what you're saying, except that since the disambiguation, if any, would be (Chile), using the full name is an elegant solution. The thing is, though, I don't think Santiago would need a disambiguation, so maybe we should remove the "de Chile" disambiguation from that title. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:30, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I think you're right regarding Santiago – though I guess it's best if we brought up the Santiago issue on Talk:Santiago de Chile. -- SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 07:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I started the thread. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've commented on that thread. -- SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 08:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)


 * . Long official names (common throughout Latin America) are almost never used by locals nor by travelers, who prefer simpler, commonly used termsd (which are also more likely to appear on signs, etc.) Using awkward official names only serves to create more confusion for real travelers on the road. Mrkstvns (talk) 17:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * per Mrkstvns. Brycehughes (talk) 09:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm removing this discussion from WV:RFC as ❌. There is clear consensus to keep the name as-is. -- SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 08:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)