Talk:Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries (Ontario)

Add topic
Active discussions

Requested move 29 September 2017Edit

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: Withdrawing this individual RM, in favor of a mass requested move {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 02:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)


Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (Ontario)Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport – Unnecessary disambiguatior; no other articles have this title Pppery 20:57, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose. On the basis of evidence presented by Huw immediately below, I am striking my support vote and changing it to oppose. I was hoping to eliminate the parenthetical qualifier, but confronted by very similar entities with qualifiers such as "(Malaysia)", "(Thailand)" or "(Ethiopia)", I see this nomination as selective, rather than all-encompassing and would now support this type of change only if it were done as a mass nomination of all such ministries. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 01:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
    I didn't deliberately choose this one. I just wasn't aware of any other similarly titled articles untile Huwmanbeing posted below. {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 02:01, 1 October 2017 (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.

Requested move 1 October 2017Edit

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.

Not moved; there is a clear consensus against moving these articles as proposed. bd2412 T 03:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

– Unnecessary disambiguators {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 02:57, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Support per mass nomination. None of these ministries has the exact same title, thus making the parenthetical qualifiers indeed unnecessary. No information would be lost to users — if anyone still prefers to type the longer titles with qualifiers, such titles will continue to exist as redirects. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 03:52, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Sure, none of these ministries currently has the exact same title, but ministries change titles as portfolios change, and sooner or later at least some of these will duplicate names/translations, just as they have in the past. Examples include the German Ministry of Economics, the French Ministry of the Navy, the Peruvian of the Presidency, the Danish Ministry of Taxes, the Mongolian Ministry of Science and Education, the Indian Ministry for Rural Affairs... Additionally, the disambiguated forms provide instantaneous recognition in bulk. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 04:44, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose, per Hydronium Hydroxide and because ministries of many countries will have very similar names and listing them with the country descriptor avoids confusion. I'm sorry to oppose this, because of the hard work and the informative good faith list created by the nominator. Randy Kryn (talk) 05:00, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. De minimis non curat lex as regards small unclear differences between over a hundred confusingly similar names. Leave the bracketed nation/state/etc disambiguator on. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:24, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Country disambiguators are helpful when you are uncertain of some long-winded ministry name but certain of the country you want this information on. Also, it must be standard to have country disambiguators for the ministries with names common to several countries, which are probably the more important ones (although, how is it that Japan is the only country with a Ministry of the Navy?). Dhtwiki (talk) 07:35, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Removing the country doesn't help the reader in the least and instead it makes it much harder to distinguish between a raft of what in many cases are quite ambiguous and similarly-titled articles.
    To put it in policy terms, many if not all of the proposed titles fail on a couple of fronts, notably recognizability and precision. Per policy, a good title is one that unambiguously identifies a subject so that someone familiar with (though not an expert in) the subject will clearly recognize it. I think it's a stretch to assume that non-experts will be able to successfully discern which is which when presented with titles like (say): the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism versus the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, or Ministry of Defence and National Security versus Ministry of Defense and National Security. I think even experts would struggle with that. ╠╣uw [talk] 11:36, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose There may be only one article with these names but it's only a matter of time before another one comes along with the same name and we are forced to disambiguate and correct all the wiki links that have been created in the mean time. Echoing Dhtwiki, I refuse to believe that Uganda is the only country to ever had a Ministry of Local Government.--Obi2canibe (talk) 15:49, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Support (generally) per WP:DAB (but for the few cases that User:Huwmanbeing notes might actually be ambiguous). Such moves are entirely consistent with policy and practice at Wikipedia while opposition above takes the form of WP:CRYSTALBALL ("sooner or later at least some of these will duplicate names"), WP:NOTHARMINGANYONE, and WP:IVENEVERHEARDOFIT. I'll add an accusation of WP:SYSTEMICBIAS/WP:GEOBIAS as well. When Wikipedia has preemptively disambiguated titles like Department for Education (United Kingdom), Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (United Kingdom), Department of the Environment and Energy (Australia), or Ministry for Culture and Heritage (New Zealand) for "important" English-speaking countries, then I'll reconsider. —  AjaxSmack  17:30, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Obi2canibe. Beagel (talk) 18:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment. Since, within Wikipedia main title headers, parenthetical qualifiers are used primarily (or almost entirely) for providing disambiguation between (or among) same (rather than simply similar) titles, another suggestion might be to avoid the use of qualifiers by replacing them with em-dashes, thusly:
    Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (Ontario)Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport — Ontario. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 04:07, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose Even if they are not exactly the same names, it will still be confusing to readers to not have the country listed.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 23:40, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above; these minor differences are not consistently maintained in sources, so this is a WP:SMALLDIFFERENCES failure. A large number of these are also translations, also not given consistently in sources.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  02:42, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose the "(country)" disambiguator ensures that readers are aware of if the page is the one they're looking for. The names of these ministries will inevitably change, and perhaps overlap, which would make it harder to maintain and do cleanup of incoming links when that happens. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:13, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Support iff they are truly unambiguous. If not, the base title needs to be created as a disambiguation or redirected to a relevant page that serves as one. -- Tavix (talk) 18:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose while there may not currently be any other Wikipedia pages for ministries of these names, there's no reason to believe that they don't exist, or won't exist in the future. For two examples, I find it hard to believe that Japan is the only country to have ever had a Ministry of the Navy, or that Serbia is the only country to have ever had a Ministry of Religion. Even if it is true, the move effectively creates a WP:EGG. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per Huwmanbeing and Obi2canibe, as well as per WP:NCGAL and WP:SMALLDETAILS. Many of these names comprise either common terms that are not unambiguous and/or names that are so similar to others that could get easily confused. NCGAL specifically states that when names for government ministries are not unique, those should be properly disambiguated (and do not confuse "unique" with "not having the exact same title as another article" (confusion is still very possible between similarly named articles)). See WP:PRECISE). Also consider that under SMALLDETAILS, "the general approach is that whatever readers might type in the search box, they are guided as swiftly as possible to the topic they might reasonably be expected to be looking for". If I was to look for the Haitian Ministry of Agriculture in the search box, it would be absolutely impossible for me to differentiate it from the Afghan, Serbian or Spanish ones without the disambiguation in the title. An average reader wouldn't usually know what the exact name of the country's ministry is, and wouldn't be able to differentiate it from others at first glance. Impru20 (talk) 21:41, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Strongly oppose as ZXCVBNM has said, I completely agree.--AirWolf talk 01:18, 6 October 2017 (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.