Content deleted Content added
SMcCandlish (talk | contribs) →Comment referring to chicken: Why are we still going over this? |
SMcCandlish (talk | contribs) →Comment referring to chicken: clarification |
||
Line 288:
::::::Articles are already about both. That is the situation at hand! There is no need to request merge (nor to split).
::::::And please think about the reader here! [[Sebright Bantams]] and [[Sebright (chicken)]] are both fine. The inexpedienced reader is likely not to know, what to expect with <code>Sebright Bantams</code>; <code>Sebright (chicken)</code> is better, on this one (WP:PRECISE) --[[User:PigeonIP|PigeonIP]] ([[User talk:PigeonIP|talk]]) 11:13, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
:::::::1) I {{em|know}}; I'm not the one who brought that up. I'm saying discussion of whether or not we {{em|want}} articles to be about both is off-topic here, so we need to stop going on about it <sigh>. 2) I {{em|am}}; [[Sebright Bantam]] (not plural), if that is the formal name of the breed in some registries, and [[Sebright chicken]] (not parenthetical) are both permissible names with regard to that breed, under our naming conventions. If the Sebright came in non-bantam form as well and the article covered both, it should be at [[Sebright chickens]] (plural) if they're treated as separate breeds with their own standards, or [[Sebright chicken]] if treated as variants of one breed with a single published standard. If "Chicken" is actually part of the formal breed name, it would be [[Sebright Chicken]]. If there were a notable individual hen named Sebright, her article would be [[Sebright (chicken)]]. This is not difficult. <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> 11:28, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
====Comment refering to [[:Category:Turkey breeds|turkey breeds]]====
| |||