Wikipedia:Requested moves/Log/2018 January 23

This is the daily log of requested moves filed or relisted on 23 January 2018.

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: Moved (non-admin closure) power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Guilty Party → Guilty Party (video game) – Or Disney's Guilty Party. Doesn't seem to have a claim on WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and Guilty Party should probably redirect to the disambiguation page at Guilty party. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:29, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support 'video game' descriptor, and per nom. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support In ictu oculi (talk) 10:10, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A Guilty Party is a guilty party is the culprit in a law case or similar, and that meaning is much more important than puzzles and games and television series episodes. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:45, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support and redirect Guilty Party to Guilty party instead._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 21:42, 25 January 2018 (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.

►Talk:Guilty Party (video game) § Requested move 23 January 2018

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: Moved Artix Kreiger (talk) 20:49, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– Per WP:USSTATION, stations that don't already have the "station" context should have them. Plus, it's unclear as to the common names or even the official names of the stations (Capital Metro themselves uses "Station" on their website, but refers to them at the stations without the "station" context). Additionally, we need to keep consistent with other stations that have undergone similar RMs.

Lastly, for that matter, the Crestview station in Texas should take precedence over the defunct station in Florida given that the former has actual ridership, hence why I'm proposing to move that page as well. ToThAc (talk) 01:45, 23 January 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:29, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the move of Downtown station without disambiguation; there are other similarly-named stations which make that not be the primary topic (Downtown Crossing station, Downtown MRT station, Azusa Downtown station etc.). No opinion on anything else. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:32, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the move of Downtown station without disambiguation. Please check the others to be certain there's no other Lakeline or Leander somewhere. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:25, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Power~enwiki and In ictu oculi: Good point. I will create a disambiguation page for Downtown station, which can then have either Downtown station be moved to Downtown station (Capital MetroRail), or have the disambiguation page be moved to Downtown station (disambiguation) once this RM closes. ToThAc (talk) 16:17, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support all now that Downtown station has been fixed per the objections above. Dicklyon (talk) 05:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral on Crestview #1; Support all others. Now that the Downtown thing has been fixed, I'd support almost all of these moves. The only one I'm iffy on is the first Crestview one you mentioned. Can you provide proof that the MetroRail Crestview station is much more of a primary topic than the defunct Crestview station? I'd support the defunct one moving to "Crestview station (defunct)", but should "Crestview station" just be a WP:TWODABS situation?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Paintspot (talk • contribs)

@Paintspot: The Crestview station in Texas has more than double the number of Google hits of the Crestview station in Florida. Also, simply typing "crestview station florida" brings up fire stations instead. ToThAc (talk) 23:26, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted a WP:RMTR request so this request can be closed. Artix Kreiger (talk) 20:14, 5 February 2018 (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.

►Talk:Crestview (Capital MetroRail station) § Requested move 23 January 2018

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: MOVED (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:03, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2 Tone (music genre) → Two-tone (music genre) – Lower-case "tone" per WP:NCCAPS, MOS:CAPS (do not capitalize genres); spell out "two" per MOS:NUM; hyphenate compound adjectives per MOS:HYPHEN. Doing a quick search that weeds out the proper name 2 Tone Records and Wikipedia itself [1], you find this written all sorts of ways, including "two-tone", "Two-Tone", "Two-tone", "twotone", "Twotone", "TwoTone", "2 tone", "2 Tone", "2-tone", "2-Tone", "2tone", and "2Tone". WP doesn't apply capital letters, numeral substitutions, or any other specialized stylization – even for registered trademarks, which this is not – unless the vast majority of sources do it consistently. Definitely not the case here. The hyphenation will be consistent with other similar titles such as eight-ball, three-cushion billiards, two-up two-down, three-strikes law, twelve-step program, etc., etc., etc. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 01:29, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support "two-tone suits" In ictu oculi (talk) 10:12, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - I'm iffy on this one, as it's directly named after 2 Tone Records... Paintspot Infez (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support While the record label was named 2 Tone, the genre seems to primarily go by "two tone". See Here, a documentary titled "Two Tone Britain", Here is a music album that uses "Two Tone" to clearly refer to the genre. You can see other albums on that page such as "Best of 2 Tone" which clearly refer to the record label. It appears that in the greater world, the two spellings have diverged such that "Two Tone Ska" or "Two Tone" refers to the musical genre, while "2 Tone" refers to Jerry Dammer's label. --Jayron32 16:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- And we don't capitalize music genres here; just a reminder. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 01:28, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Don't confuse the genre with the label. Dicklyon (talk) 05:04, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Jayron's findings show that the genre can be spelled out. Binksternet (talk) 05:23, 27 January 2018 (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.

►Talk:2 Tone (music genre) § Requested move 23 January 2018

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: Moved. (non-admin closure) –Ammarpad (talk) 05:31, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic sword → Arab sword – Per WP:COMMONNAME. See specialist sword books: Burton, Sir Richard F. (1884). The Book of the Sword. Cosimo, Inc. p. 51. ISBN 9781605204376. Fig 72 - Arab sword and Evangelista, Nick (1995). The Encyclopedia of the Sword. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 335. ISBN 9780313278969. Khandoo. A type of Arab sword. See also Google book results.

Of the few sources used in the article that are viewable online, two of three use "Arab sword", none use "Arabic sword". The previous article moves were both done without discussion. Batternut (talk) 00:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support the adjective is Arab not Arabic In ictu oculi (talk) 10:14, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rreagan007 (talk) 16:47, 24 January 2018 (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.

►Talk:Arabic sword § Requested move 23 January 2018

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: Moved. No consensus for moves of The Party Party (radio series) (non-admin closure) power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:19, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Party Party → Party Party – Per WP:THE and WP:CONCISE, especially since only one entry on the disambiguate page has "The" in the front of it. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 00:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Party Party! Randy Kryn (talk) 01:01, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support per nom. However, since only one thing is fully officially called "THE Party Party", I'd also possibly weakly-support "The Party Party (radio series)" to move to "The Party Party". Paintspot Infez (talk) 03:52, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support as normative. I would oppose moving anything over "The Party Party", though, since such things tend to be prefaced with a definite article. bd2412 T 05:15, 23 January 2018 (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.

►Talk:The Party Party § Requested move 23 January 2018