Content deleted Content added
→Survey: Comment |
SMcCandlish (talk | contribs) →is all that fuss really about reading "sheep" in brackets as individual sheep?: None of that is applicable reasoning, Jlan. |
||
Line 308:
--[[User:PigeonIP|PigeonIP]] ([[User talk:PigeonIP|talk]]) 17:33, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
:::The best I have seen on offer is: [[Bracket#Specific uses]]. You have mentioned WP:NATURAL which shows the extent of instruction in relation to [[Wikipedia:Article titles#Disambiguation]]. Otherwise there is a notable absence of mention of brackets in the guidelines. This absence of information may, in itself, say something. [[User:Gregkaye|Gregkaye]] [[User talk:Gregkaye|<span style="color:Black"><big>✍</big>♪</span>]] 11:54, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
::::Well, the fact that the one example the policy gives of an animal term followed by a more general animal term is explcitly stated to refer to an individual animal, and hundreds of such animal articles exist using precisely this kind of parenthetical disamiguation (e.g. on racehorse articles) is a very strong indication that the RM contemplated here, to move numerous breed articles [back] to parenthetical disambiguation is a really bad idea. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 06:06, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
* '''Support''' restoring all to their original titles ('''except''' those for which {{u|Anthony Appleyard}} has raised objection) per experienced editors in this area including {{u|Richard New Forest}} ({{diff|Talk:Canadian Speckle Park|prev|626360831|here}}), {{u|Steven Walling}} and {{u|BlindEagle}} above, and particularly {{u|PigeonIP}} whose detailed analysis and careful rationale at [[Talk:Strasser pigeon]] is completely convincing. SMcCandlish writes above that [[WP:NATURAL]] "requires" us to use his preferred format. It doesn't do anything of the sort. It specifically enjoins us to avoid made-up names, and most certainly does not suggest that we ignore [[WP:COMMONSENSE]] to the point of creating titles with mixed capitalisation such as [[White-faced Black Spanish chicken]]. What next, [[Harvard university]] (possible rationale: " ... the word 'university' is just a disambiguator and is not part of the common name of the institution")? [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]] ([[User talk:Justlettersandnumbers|talk]]) 12:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
::'''Note'''. The outcome of this discussion may affect other recent move requests by SMcCandlish including:
Line 319 ⟶ 320:
::* [[:Harz Red mountain cattle]] → {{no redirect|Harz cattle}}
::[[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]] ([[User talk:Justlettersandnumbers|talk]]) 13:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
:::You seem to have missed the critique of the reasoning by PigeonIP, et al., above. You're also making a bogus [[argument to authority]] and to tenure, in suggesting that "experienced editors in [the topic] area" know more about WP article titling policy that the rest of Wikipedia (see the essay [[WP:Specialist style fallacy]] for an exploration of why that's not reasonable). You're next engaging in a [[straw man]]; no one has suggested anything at all like "Harvard university", much less on the irrational basis that "university" is a natural disambiguator; it's a false analogy. Finally, the outcome of this this RM is unlikely to affect other RMs at all, because it's a request for a ''status quo ante'' mass revert of moves from over two months ago, and does not address the merits of any of the names. I've broken them out into groups for discussion on the merits, and most responses to have have been in favor of the moves as they are, or suggestions that each article should be discussed individually. As noted above, there was already an agreement between me, yourself, and the admins most likely to be performing any such moves that we would not be doing a ''status quo ante'' revert, but rather discussion the names on their merits. Why is it that you're now so insistent on ''status quo ante'' reverts you already agreed not to pursue, and avoiding the substantive discussion of the names? <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 06:06, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
{{od}}And that's the tip of the iceberg of move requests, there are at least six across multiple articles. May want to consolidate all of these at WP:Agriculture. JMO. [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]]</sup> 03:46, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
| |||