This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kansas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of Kansas 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.KansasWikipedia:WikiProject KansasTemplate:WikiProject KansasKansas articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
There is a move discussion in progress on
Talk:First Ladies and Partners of California which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —
RMCD bot 14:36, 1 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Requested move 13 December 2022
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. While
Scope creep was the editor carrying out the moves, I find that there is a consensus to move to the proposed title. Noting the exchange at the end of the discussion, this closure does not preclude further possible moves to 'List of...' titles if necessary. (
closed by non-admin page mover)
– robertsky (
talk) 00:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment. Added Texas above. Don't yet have an opinion on the outcome of this.
— Maile (
talk) 16:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment. I have a comment on just one of these lists; namely the one that says Georgia. I support that it should be moved to indicate that it's clearly about the country.
Georgia guy (
talk) 16:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Support, obviously, not only per Wikipedia's style guide but also per virtually every academic and journalistic style guide out there, including the Oxford Manual of Style The Chicago Manual of Style, and AP Stylebook. This overcapitalization looks very unencyclopedic.
Surtsicna (
talk) 16:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Support Not a proper noun in this situation since it not about a specific person. I also support the existing proposal to move First Ladies and Gentlemen of Georgia as it could be confused with the First lady list for the US State.--
65.92.162.81 (
talk) 22:34, 13 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Good catch. I guess
Second ladies of India (2a) makes more sense as it makes the fewest changes. The article can be changed to 2b later when that becomes necessary.
Woko Sapien (
talk) 15:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Hi
Scope creep, I believe the seven days for open discussion have now passed. The consensus seems pretty clear, so feel free to move this if you'd like.
Woko Sapien (
talk) 22:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose - as those are proper titles.
GoodDay (
talk) 09:51, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Seen many similar move requests like this editor
GoodDay, and the consensual trend has been to treat the singular titles as proper names in upper case, while the plural titles are treated as common names in lower case. That is why this request has received so much support. Just sayin'. P.I. Ellsworth ,
ed.put'r there 11:21, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
It appears that the nom is just following the present naming system of these articles with as little change as possible to incur as little objection as possible. The
WP naming convention tells us that the usage of "List of..." is a "common practice"; however, while these articles could be said to be titled in an unusual, uncommon manner, it seems okay to entitle them that way, at least for now. The issue here is that plural usages should be in lower case, not in upper case. Small steps get more yeps? P.I. Ellsworth ,
ed.put'r there 11:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Yeah, that was my thought process in a nutshell. I toyed with adding "List of..." to my proposal, but figured that could complicate the discussion more than it needs to be. But I'm certainly open to adding "List of..." to these titles later on. For now, I decided to just follow the
KISS principle.
Woko Sapien (
talk) 15:02, 20 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.
@
Woko Sapien: They're is 133 redirects [
[1]] that will need to be addressed. I don't know what you want to do with them. scope_creepTalk 23:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Typically
double redirects are resolved in the discussion closure process, or they're fixed by bots later on.
Woko Sapien (
talk) 15:21, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
That doesn't automatically happen when the
WP:Page mover incompetently suppresses redirects. –
wbm1058 (
talk) 16:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Oh jeez, what a mess! Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help untangle this.
Woko Sapien (
talk) 17:02, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Scope creep why did you suppress the redirect creation though? and remember to close the discussion.
– robertsky (
talk) 23:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Page swapped the Philippines article.
– robertsky (
talk) 23:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Paine Ellsworth, let me know if I have missed out any redirects. Have followed up with the Talk page redirects creation.
– robertsky (
talk) 06:51, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
To editor
robertsky: thank you very much for your follow up! Get a chance, check out one or two of the redirects and talk pages, as I made some small improvements. Thanks again!P.I. Ellsworth ,
ed.put'r there 15:13, 24 December 2022 (UTC)reply