Talk:Triumph & Demise: The Broken Promise of a Labor Generation
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Dreamy Jazz in topic Requested move 11 September 2018
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
 | On 11 September 2018, it was proposed that this article be moved from Triumph & Demise to Triumph & Demise: The Broken Promise of a Labor Generation. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Requested move 11 September 2018 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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Consensus to move, therefore, moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:22, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Triumph & Demise → Triumph & Demise: The Broken Promise of a Labor Generation – WP:SUBTITLE is just a guideline, not a policy. Per WP:COMMONNAME, seems original name is a common name Hhkohh (talk) 10:57, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support. Shortened name is unhelpful and less clear. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:39, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support/Restore how many of these were done as TRs? In ictu oculi (talk) 15:13, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- @In ictu oculi: IP submitted 55 requests as TR on September 8–9. But now 26 requests are under discussion. 28 requests were moved by Alex or Frayae but moved back by me today. Only 1 request was moved successfully and not reverted Hhkohh (talk) 15:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Okay then any others like this one should have been reverted using technical restore. No need for an RM starting from the wrong end. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- @In ictu oculi: IP submitted 55 requests as TR on September 8–9. But now 26 requests are under discussion. 28 requests were moved by Alex or Frayae but moved back by me today. Only 1 request was moved successfully and not reverted Hhkohh (talk) 15:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support Another case of the IP editor seeking to undertake a controversial move without discussion after misinterpreting the spirit of WP:SUBTITLE. The original title was more unambiguous and also the WP:COMMONNAME. AusLondonder (talk) 23:50, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose I see no issue with the initial requested move, and it abides by the given guideline. Seems to be a case of editors not liking the IP editor, based only on the facts that they are solely an IP and that they are abiding by guidelines. Noted on the requesting editor deliberately not pinging the above mentioned editors. -- AlexTW 04:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Please refrain from unfounded accusations of poor faith. I don't know anything about an IP editor, I'm objecting to this move as a specifically bad one. The Drover's Wife (talk) 05:54, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- AlexTheWhovian - what's more an issue is that WP:SUBTITLE takes as examples books which are classics and do have WP:COMMONNAME. Borderline notable recent books simply don't have established common names. And likewise, less of the accusation of poor faith please. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:52, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- @In ictu oculi: Now I have concern about AlexTheWhovian has WP:COI with the IP editor per other editors comment and all his oppose behaviors and especially this edit Hhkohh (talk) 09:57, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- AlexTheWhovian - what's more an issue is that WP:SUBTITLE takes as examples books which are classics and do have WP:COMMONNAME. Borderline notable recent books simply don't have established common names. And likewise, less of the accusation of poor faith please. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:52, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support - per nom. That guideline is based on false assumptions that all media does that, which in fact they do not. Also, please note that the name was changed to the shorter version without discussion so in case of a no-consensus the title should be restored to the former name. --Gonnym (talk) 15:40, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.