Talk:Teeswater sheep: Difference between revisions

:::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 [note: I'm not "citing myself" - it's not a guideline, it's simply a page in which some reasoning has been laid out so it can be referred to without re-re-re-repeating it]). 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|¢]] ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ </span> 06:06, 26 September 2014 (UTC)