- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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.
The result of the proposal was
Lake Baikal is what just about everyone expects when going to "Baikal". Baikal village is very small and quite secondary in importance when compared to Lake Baikal. Baikal village page should be renamed as "Baikal_(village)" and "Baikal" should redirect to "Lake Baikal". If there is a good argument for not redirecting "Baikal" to "Lake Baikal", "Baikal" should redirect to "Baikal_(disambiguation)", instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.111.137 (talk) 17:34, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
- Support - Yes, I do agree with this one. I assume most people when thinking of "Baikal" think of the Lake. This article should be move to Baikal, Irkutsk , or what ever other title is would be correct per WP:NAME. --Eye of the Mind 22:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
- Oppose. First of all, this is not a village but an urban-type settlement (yes, I am planning to copy-edit this article later). Second, the spelling ("Baykal") is per WP:RUS. Third, "Baykal, Irkutsk Oblast" is the name that is supposed to be used per WP:NC:CITY#Russia. In light of that, I moved the article to "Baykal, Irkutsk Oblast" where it belongs. As for the issues surrounding the disambiguation page title, they should be raised on the talk page of the disambiguation page, not here.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.
