Talk:Associative containers (C++)

Latest comment: 6 months ago by BegbertBiggs in topic Requested move 26 September 2023

Requested move 26 September 2023 edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. There is some disagreement over the exact best title, but a clear consensus that the old title is too ambiguous (see also WP:NOTCURRENTTITLE). This is not to preclude future requests to move to the singular form or use a different type of disambiguation. (closed by non-admin page mover) BegbertBiggs (talk) 21:55, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply



Associative containersAssociative containers (C++) – Plural form is insufficient disambiguation from general concept, "Associative container". Notice there was a previous requested move declined seemingly unilaterally, without consensus. [1] The page also seems to have been created with the proposed suffix, then moved, also without discussion. fgnievinski (talk) 05:41, 26 September 2023 (UTC) — Relisting.  ASUKITE 19:42, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I don't see a strong reason for this to be WP:PLURAL in the first place, so I'd like to propose the alternative of C++ associative container (also per WP:NATURALDAB and consistency with the C articles). Your thoughts Fgnievinski and In ictu oculi? Alpha3031 (tc) 10:00, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
It could be a redirect but I maintain the original proposal, with a suffix, for consistency with other pages in the same C++ category. fgnievinski (talk) 20:51, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Note: WikiProject C/C++ has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 19:42, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Relisting comment: This can be closed now, but it may benefit from a little more time for a stronger consensus ASUKITE 19:42, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.