This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
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.
Support Yes, the article title is a generic name, describing all government ministries responsible for religious affairs, regardless of whether they use that title or not (see content). The ministries in the individual countries have proper names. WP guidance consensus is clear at
WP:NCCAPS and
MOS:CAPS (specifically
MOS:INSTITUTIONS)
Davidships (
talk)
03:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is a proper name. The page serves as a disambiguation page of various institutions which use that proper name. It is not about "ministries of religious affairs". If it was plural, or listed as plural, I could go for it. But in singular form, it reflects a proper name.
Also, @
Primergrey, I think it is rather bad form to split each ministry into separate RMs and force commentators to discover what other pages are being proposed to move, and repeat the same arguments elsewhere, forcing discussion to be fragmented and scattered across multiple pages. It is even poorer form not to even link to the other RMs here. The RMs should have been consolidated into one multiple-move request. If possible, I'd like to request that all the individual RMs be closed and for @Primergrey reformulate his RM request as a multi-page move.
Walrasiad (
talk)
06:12, 17 February 2023 (UTC)reply
No, but there are plenty of other undiscussed moves to revert if you look through Primergrey's contribution history. 2 of the separate RMs are as a result of UltraSRG not processing the contested technical requests as multipage request.
– robertsky (
talk)
11:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)reply
This one seems to be the first of the four that was requested. Thus, I suggest to focus the discussion here and encourage the others to wait for this one to close. —
BarrelProof (
talk)
14:11, 17 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. "Religious Affairs" or equivalent is essentially always capitalized in the subarticles, so the usage here should mirror that. (The same oppose vote for the other Ministry of XYZs, as well.)
SnowFire (
talk)
05:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. This article is about ministries of religious affairs in the abstract, not a specific Ministry of Religious Affairs of [Placename]. —
SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 23:32, 23 February 2023 (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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
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.
Support Yes, the article title is a generic name, describing all government ministries responsible for religious affairs, regardless of whether they use that title or not (see content). The ministries in the individual countries have proper names. WP guidance consensus is clear at
WP:NCCAPS and
MOS:CAPS (specifically
MOS:INSTITUTIONS)
Davidships (
talk)
03:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is a proper name. The page serves as a disambiguation page of various institutions which use that proper name. It is not about "ministries of religious affairs". If it was plural, or listed as plural, I could go for it. But in singular form, it reflects a proper name.
Also, @
Primergrey, I think it is rather bad form to split each ministry into separate RMs and force commentators to discover what other pages are being proposed to move, and repeat the same arguments elsewhere, forcing discussion to be fragmented and scattered across multiple pages. It is even poorer form not to even link to the other RMs here. The RMs should have been consolidated into one multiple-move request. If possible, I'd like to request that all the individual RMs be closed and for @Primergrey reformulate his RM request as a multi-page move.
Walrasiad (
talk)
06:12, 17 February 2023 (UTC)reply
No, but there are plenty of other undiscussed moves to revert if you look through Primergrey's contribution history. 2 of the separate RMs are as a result of UltraSRG not processing the contested technical requests as multipage request.
– robertsky (
talk)
11:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)reply
This one seems to be the first of the four that was requested. Thus, I suggest to focus the discussion here and encourage the others to wait for this one to close. —
BarrelProof (
talk)
14:11, 17 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. "Religious Affairs" or equivalent is essentially always capitalized in the subarticles, so the usage here should mirror that. (The same oppose vote for the other Ministry of XYZs, as well.)
SnowFire (
talk)
05:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. This article is about ministries of religious affairs in the abstract, not a specific Ministry of Religious Affairs of [Placename]. —
SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 23:32, 23 February 2023 (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.