Talk:Nottebohm case

International relations: Law Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject International law.

European Microstates: Liechtenstein Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Liechtenstein.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge proposal

Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments6 people in discussion

Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala) and Liechtenstein v. Guatemala are two articles on exactly the same topic with exactly the same scope. They should be merged. The "Nottebohm" name is preferred after reviewing Category:International Court of Justice cases, where most articles' titles are led with a case descriptor, rather than just being in the "plaintiff v. defendant" format. Ipoellet (talk) 21:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Though Liechtenstein v. Guatemala is the older and more complete article, I agree with adding the official ICJ identifier to the title of the article. Too bad the individual starting Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala) didn't just homogenize the format himself. It has been two weeks since your post, I say go ahead with the merge. 67.160.161.176 (talk) 07:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

As the creator of the original page I agree with the merge, and the use of the identifier. I will proceed with the merge on 3 June if there aren't any more comments. --Ondra2 (talk) 09:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, please go ahead with the merger with the title "Nottebohm (Lichtenstein v. Guatemala)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.17.124 (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

It would be much better with the merge. The former article is more complete while this one(Which I initiated) has some additional info and appropriate headline. So, after merge, appropriate changes can be made. Turcopolis (talk) 9 Aug 2008 —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Finally merged. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 09:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Requested move

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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. 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: moved. Unopposed for over a week. Jenks24 (talk) 07:51, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala) → Nottebohm case – There's little consistency in the way cases of the International Court of Justice are named on Wikipedia, and as far as I know it's never been discussed much. I think it's time to start renaming some of these to conform with WP:COMMONNAME. This was the first such discussion. In this instance, I believe that the case is known most commonly as "Nottebohm case", or simply "Nottebohm". Nottebohm is a disambiguation page, so I think we should go with Nottebohm case. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:15, 29 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

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.

Add topic