Talk:DS 7 Crossback

Requested move 27 September 2022

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: No consensus. Following the principle "when in doubt, disambiguate", and the concerns that "DS 7" is ambiguous (although the car may well be the primary topic), I will redirect it to the dab page DS7. As usual, a no consensus close may be subject to revisiting in near future. No such user (talk) 07:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

---

DS 7 Crossback → DS 7 – With the recent 2022 facelift, the car changed its name, ditching the Crossback subtitle (jabz) 15:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 16:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

• Note: WikiProject Automobiles has been notified. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 16:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

If we were starting a brand new article then either name would be fine. Under the general idea of WP:RETAIN, I would leave it as-is. Who knows, maybe next year they will restore the old name or give it an entirely new name. In any of these cases, a redirect, such as DS 7, will bring the reader here.  Stepho  talk  22:53, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

• Comment - I would support per WP:CONCISE, however I think that DS 7 is perhaps ambiguous, and should actually redirect to DS7, a disambiguation page, and so this article should stay with the current name as a natural disambiguation. Certainly if that is not redirected a hatnote should be added to this article (whether it is moved or not). I'm struggling to see the relevance of WP:RETAIN as that refers to the variety of English an article is written in. A7V2 (talk) 03:41, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

  That's why I said the general idea of WP:RETAIN. When there are multiple valid ways of doing something and one of them is already implemented then we shouldn't swap between them without a very, very good reason.  Stepho  talk  04:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

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.

@Stepho-wrs:: something like this is indeed codified in WP:TITLECHANGES: If an article title has been stable for a long time,[9] and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed. Now, rebranding does qualify as a good reason, but given the ambiguity (and recognizability) concerns, I agree that the old title is good enough for the time being. No such user (talk) 07:32, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Cut and paste move

Really sorry, as I was impatient and cannot wait for the speedy deletion of the redirect. I did move the existing redirect to my userpage and speedy deleting it also. — Preceding undated comment added 18:41, 28 October 2022 (UTC)