Notable alumni edit

The notable alumni section is far too large and it isn't cited to reliable sources in any way. It has no criteria as to what makes them "notable" I suggest turning it into a prose form along the lines of major award winners plus those notable for any achievements outside of Acting. All other alumni are on the separate list article anyway. Woody (talk) 12:17, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 26 November 2022 edit

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: Moved. There is a consensus in terms of numbers, and MOS:ACRO seems met too; there's no guideline I know of which backs up the "we should always prefer full names over abbreviations" aseertion below  — Amakuru (talk) 12:30, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply


Royal Academy of Dramatic ArtRADA – Per WP:COMMONNAME and following the examples of FIFA, PBS, BBC, and NATO, we should have this as RADA. While Royal Academy of Dramatic Art is used, the overwhelming common usage - as indicated by the sources used in the article, and a Google search, is RADA. SilkTork (talk) 18:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:08, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

  • Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:47, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose. Yes, it's very commonly known as RADA. But Royal Academy of Dramatic Art is also in common usage. We should always prefer full names over abbreviations (otherwise we'd have to rename the Royal Air Force article, for instance). -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:42, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • Support per MOS:ACRO. Shwcz (talk) 16:01, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
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.
  • @Amakuru, SilkTork, Ortizesp, Necrothesp, and Shwcz: the article has been moved to a different name than proposed. Is this a mistake? Marcocapelle (talk) 13:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
    User:Marcocapelle - it seems that the discussion target was altered by an IP editor on 26 December 2022, 13 days after the discussion had been closed as moved. The proposed target during the discussion, and that which found consensus, was simply for RADA. I have undone the subsequent change so it now reads correctly again. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 13:48, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply