This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the
project page for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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.
I started this discussion because I had moved the page a while back, but it was moved back because my move was "spurious". I don't know how using correct English is spurious. Are there any serious objections to this move?
Stevie is the man!Talk •
Work13:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose – I think Kwami's reason for reverting your move as "spurious" was that he thought you had failed to consider
MOS:NDASH where it says: "Instead of a hyphen, when applying a prefix (but not a suffix) to a compound that includes a space" (like in ex–prime minister and Trans–New Guinea). If the "mid" is a prefix modifying "Mississippi Valley", the en dash is there to give the reader a clue to that.
Dicklyon (
talk)
05:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Not speaking to the guideline, it would have been more constructive if that user had told me about it rather than saying the change was "spurious". As for the guideline, it's new to me, and I'd never been taught that in English class, nor have I ever heard of it. That guideline may be spurious. :) But if that's what it says, I'll drop this.
Stevie is the man!Talk •
Work11:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose.
MOS:DASH recommends the dash in this case, see the "pre–World War II" example. Personally I think a hyphen would suffice as the capital letters make it clear that "mid" applies to the entire "Mississippi Valley" but we should go with the guideline.
Jenks24 (
talk)
13:13, 30 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Now, unlike in the case "pre–World War II", here we use "Mid-Mississippi" with a capital "M". Is it because "Mid-Mississippi Valley" is a proper known?
Arbitrarily0(
talk)21:07, 30 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Good suggestion, I would support a move to
March 1980 middle Mississippi Valley tornado outbreak.
MOS:DASH actually recommends reconstructing if possible and, as you say, it does seem to be common enough. I would probably go against capitalising "middle" as it only seems to be capitalised in 50% of sources and I'm not seeing any evidence it's clearly a proper noun and not a descriptive term. @
Dicklyon and
Arbitrarily0: would you be OK with this title?
Jenks24 (
talk)
10:23, 14 July 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the
project page for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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.
I started this discussion because I had moved the page a while back, but it was moved back because my move was "spurious". I don't know how using correct English is spurious. Are there any serious objections to this move?
Stevie is the man!Talk •
Work13:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose – I think Kwami's reason for reverting your move as "spurious" was that he thought you had failed to consider
MOS:NDASH where it says: "Instead of a hyphen, when applying a prefix (but not a suffix) to a compound that includes a space" (like in ex–prime minister and Trans–New Guinea). If the "mid" is a prefix modifying "Mississippi Valley", the en dash is there to give the reader a clue to that.
Dicklyon (
talk)
05:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Not speaking to the guideline, it would have been more constructive if that user had told me about it rather than saying the change was "spurious". As for the guideline, it's new to me, and I'd never been taught that in English class, nor have I ever heard of it. That guideline may be spurious. :) But if that's what it says, I'll drop this.
Stevie is the man!Talk •
Work11:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose.
MOS:DASH recommends the dash in this case, see the "pre–World War II" example. Personally I think a hyphen would suffice as the capital letters make it clear that "mid" applies to the entire "Mississippi Valley" but we should go with the guideline.
Jenks24 (
talk)
13:13, 30 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Now, unlike in the case "pre–World War II", here we use "Mid-Mississippi" with a capital "M". Is it because "Mid-Mississippi Valley" is a proper known?
Arbitrarily0(
talk)21:07, 30 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Good suggestion, I would support a move to
March 1980 middle Mississippi Valley tornado outbreak.
MOS:DASH actually recommends reconstructing if possible and, as you say, it does seem to be common enough. I would probably go against capitalising "middle" as it only seems to be capitalised in 50% of sources and I'm not seeing any evidence it's clearly a proper noun and not a descriptive term. @
Dicklyon and
Arbitrarily0: would you be OK with this title?
Jenks24 (
talk)
10:23, 14 July 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.