Content deleted Content added
SMcCandlish (talk | contribs) →Requested move 25 August 2014: hatnote - see also previous RM no one's mentioned yet |
Oppose 97 moves with comments. |
||
Line 132:
*# It's possible that I've missed some other, differentiatable case, but this should be clear enough to separate the majority of these into distinguishable groups that others can address by number.<p><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> 15:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)</p>
* '''Oppose''' –
::I've clarified the policy and precedent basis for #2, with an <ins>{{tag|ins}} insertion</ins>. <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> 23:28, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
:::Well, I'm not suggesting that Beltex etc. are ambiguous, or need disambiguation; rather, that [[Beltex sheep]] would be more precise and recognizable for what it is. A win on consistency, too. But that's a discussion for elsewhere, if such a move gets proposed. [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 23:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Line 150:
::My view is that mass moves should be taken to the project pages, not individual breed articles, particularly where there is more than one animal involved; for example, people working on cattle articles may not be watchlisting sheep, yet these RMs affect both projects. There are many more of these out there, and they affect multiple projects. [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]]</sup> 18:49, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
*'''OPPOSE''' '''''TIMES 97''''': OMG!! what a mess. So many want to move articles and nobody to work on them. I '''''oppose a blanket move of 97 articles''''' because it is too much to be fair to the articles.
::I am amazed, appalled, and shocked. I just can not imagine why we would want to take any article name and put a part of it in parenthesis to prove what? It does not enhance the article and it is unnecessary. Make it concise so short but then because it is now vague add a word in parenthesis that otherwise is just fine being included in the name.
::I was convinced we need to be more than vague when I randomly chose [[Polish Helmet]] (just picked one I saw) to check out in references. I looked at 5 pages on Google and 5 pages on Bing (just to see) that totaled 120 hits that I looked at individually. What I found was amazing in that I saw and learned an unimaginable amount of information about the "Polish M50", the "Used Polish Military Steel Helmet", the "Polish WZ 93 Kevlar Helmet", the "Poland Wz67 - Brendon's Helmets", how to buy, sell, and everything one could imagine concerning helmets one would wear.
::I did find three Wikipedia entries and "Polish Helmet Or Kryska Polska, A Breed Of Fancy Pigeon" that was on page two, one reference on page four and none on page five '''out of 120 hits'''. If you want to learn about helmets you wear then look up "Polish Helmet" but if you are interested in pigeons you need to add that to the search. This one needs to be fixed bad but to add parenthesis "Polish Helmet (pigeon)" just to add clarity that we are not exploring a helmet one wears? "Polish Helmet is a very short stub as is [[Helmet pigeon]] (parent), that need to be merged and forget parenthesis. Then "Humburg Helmet", the "Dutch Helmet", if they are plain-headed or shell-crested, as well as relations to the [[Nun pigeon]] can be explored in a good article. That would take editors wanting article improvements and not just moving a '''''bunch''''' of articles just to do it. I know pigeons are not the subject of '''''sheep''''', '''''chickens''''', or '''''pigs''''' but they all are (or will be) subject to indiscriminate move requests and many for absolutely no reason. Take it to the project pages!! You have got to be kidding me. One should always want to have the coyote guard the chicken right? Works great if you are not a chicken. [[User:Otr500|Otr500]] ([[User talk:Otr500|talk]]) 03:58, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
===Discussion===
| |||