- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No consensus to move. After much-extended time for discussion, there is no consensus for a move at this time, and no reasonable expectation that further relisting (after six weeks on this page) will yield a different outcome. The primary question is whether the existence of the English word, "Militia", suffices to use a translated title, Militia (Romania), or alternately whether the absence of an alternative "Miliția" indicates that the title with the diacritic does not need a disambiguator. These are reasonable questions, but consensus is required to change the status quo that has prevailed for nearly a year. The focus of the discussion on removing the diacritic may have hindered attention to the potential removal of the disambiguator, but there was little support for the latter change evinced in the discussion either, and a reasonable case could be made that the diacritic alone is too subtle to distinguish the title. I would suggest taking a break from the subject for some period of weeks, and then specifically revisiting the question of removing the disambiguator, without disturbing the diacritic. BD2412 T 05:40, 27 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Miliția (Romania) → Militia (Romania) – Per WP:ENG, there’s a perfectly good English translation of the original term, Militia, as in Militia (Yugoslavia). Alternatively, if the diacritic is kept, there’s no need to disambiguate, hence another title could be Miliția. Biruitorul Talk 21:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:04, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Support. Rreagan007 (talk) 04:31, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Oppose, I'm not convinced the English translation is commonly used enough to make sense here.--Ortizesp (talk) 01:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
- I mean, no proof has been given that the Romanian name is more used instead. See uses of the English translation here [1]. Super Ψ Dro 09:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Support per nom. Super Ψ Dro 09:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
- The question isn't whether we have a perfectly good translation, it's what name is most commonly used in reliable English-language sources. If we have evidence that the English translation is more commonly used then I support that, but otherwise would support the alternative suggestion of moving to the base name Miliția, which already redirects here.--Yaksar (let's chat) 19:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Honestly, I'm not sure (the main reason I wasn't comfortable giving a bolded vote). Your link shows a number of results, but a search using the diacritic does as well. That being said, since both are definitely used in English-language sources, if we aren't clear that one is particularly more common there may be a benefit of going with Miliția, since it allows for an unambiguous and undisambgiuated outcome.--Yaksar (let's chat) 22:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
- A rough count shows the no-diacritics version to be more common, but I can live with Miliția. — Biruitorul Talk 06:59, 24 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Oppose seriously? Are we going back to the diacritics war of 2008? It is Romania, anyone reading a Romania article will not vomit or faint if exposed to the correct spelling and correct pronuciation. T-comma (majuscule: Ț, minuscule: ț) is a letter which is part of the Romanian alphabet, used to represent the Romanian language sound /t͡s/. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:56, 21 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
- If you read what proponents wrote, you will see this isn’t the issue at all. (And come on, you know me better than that.) Rather, the question is whether we should be using the English translation, per COMMONNAME and equivalents in other Communist countries. Moreover, since there’s only one Miliția, adding (Romania) really doesn’t make sense. — Biruitorul Talk 06:59, 24 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
- I'm afraid I don't know better than that. If you think the diacritics war doesn't linger try restoring the tennis player. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:42, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Fine. But the point isn’t the diacritic. (Three articles I’ve started in the past month or so: Sapienței Church, Gábor Téglás, Ștefan Vellescu.)
- The point is that: a) Militia (Yugoslavia) exists; b) Militia (a translation rather than a non-diacritic form) is more common in English sources than Miliția; and c) “Miliția (Romania)” makes no sense, because there was only one Miliția, so if we must keep the diacritic, at least get rid of (Romania). — Biruitorul Talk 19:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
