Talk:Line 4 (Longhua Line)

Move request

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.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:19, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Longhua Line, Shenzhen Metro → Longhua Line – The "Shenzhen Metro" serves more or less a disambiguation qualifier and "Longhua Line" is more commonly addressed for the subject than the current full title. -- relisted -Mike Cline (talk) 17:47, 23 January 2012 (UTC) Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 01:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. The proposal removes valuable information that immediately shows readers if they have found the right article (or the wrong one). For a start, there are many places in China called "Longhua"; and "line" could have any one of dozens of alternative meanings. Noetica^Tea? 23:52, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
  • WP:Article title requires it to be concise, consistent and unambiguous. Once the context is clear, "Longhua Line, Shenzhen Metro" is mostly reduced to simply "Longhua Line". The ambiguity of the title should be considered as a whole phase, not separably word by word, thus "Longhua Line" itself is unambiguous because there's only 1 thing called by that name, the rapid transit route of Shenzhen Metro, not anything else. c.f. Category:MTR lines, only the lines of namesake apply the disambiguation qualifier (MTR) like Airport Express and Island Line. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 01:01, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support per WP:PRECISION. Commonly referred to as simply "Longhua Line" and I see no evidence that anything else is ever called that, let alone called it regularly enough to confuse the searcher/reader. As Noetica knows, his comment is in complete disagreement with the relevant guideline. Jenks24 (talk) 10:40, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support The likelihood of another Longhua Line existing is rather miniscule, thus the current dabbing is unnecessary, IMHO. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:47, 26 January 2012 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.