From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 21 March 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: consensus to retain the current title at this time, per the comments below and additional discussion at Talk:Offences Against the Person Act 1861. Dekimasu よ! 05:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC) reply



Offences Against the Person Act 1875 Offences against the Person Act 1875 – This page should be moved back to its original location for the same reasons that I gave in this edit when requesting that the article on the Offences against the Person Act 1861 should be moved back to its correct location. The only difference is that in this case, the short title is legally authorised by section 1 of the Offences against the Person Act 1875 itself, and not by the Short Titles Act 1896.  James500 ( talk) 04:57, 21 March 2018 (UTC) --Relisted.   Paine Ellsworth   put'r there  18:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Relist comment. WikiProjects "Politics of the United Kingdom", "Law" and "British crime" have been notified of this debate.   Paine Ellsworth   put'r there   19:18, 28 March 2018 (UTC) reply
This is a contested technical request ( permalink). -- Alex TW 05:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Survey

  • I've unbolded the comment and removed all references to a recommendation. That brings the comment into line with what the information page essay or how to essay recommends. James500 ( talk) 05:47, 31 March 2018 (UTC) reply
See here for analysis of that logic. James500 ( talk) 19:11, 2 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Discussion

From the related current RM cited above: No one disputes the requestor's logic, when it comes to relevant legal documents; that simply is not connected to the capitalisation of a single letter in a Wikipedia article title, and if we start following this kind of logic, we complicate existing rules further. [1] Very well put, and equally applicable here. But perhaps best to discuss at that other RM. Andrewa ( talk) 21:55, 28 March 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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 21 March 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: consensus to retain the current title at this time, per the comments below and additional discussion at Talk:Offences Against the Person Act 1861. Dekimasu よ! 05:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC) reply



Offences Against the Person Act 1875 Offences against the Person Act 1875 – This page should be moved back to its original location for the same reasons that I gave in this edit when requesting that the article on the Offences against the Person Act 1861 should be moved back to its correct location. The only difference is that in this case, the short title is legally authorised by section 1 of the Offences against the Person Act 1875 itself, and not by the Short Titles Act 1896.  James500 ( talk) 04:57, 21 March 2018 (UTC) --Relisted.   Paine Ellsworth   put'r there  18:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Relist comment. WikiProjects "Politics of the United Kingdom", "Law" and "British crime" have been notified of this debate.   Paine Ellsworth   put'r there   19:18, 28 March 2018 (UTC) reply
This is a contested technical request ( permalink). -- Alex TW 05:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Survey

  • I've unbolded the comment and removed all references to a recommendation. That brings the comment into line with what the information page essay or how to essay recommends. James500 ( talk) 05:47, 31 March 2018 (UTC) reply
See here for analysis of that logic. James500 ( talk) 19:11, 2 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Discussion

From the related current RM cited above: No one disputes the requestor's logic, when it comes to relevant legal documents; that simply is not connected to the capitalisation of a single letter in a Wikipedia article title, and if we start following this kind of logic, we complicate existing rules further. [1] Very well put, and equally applicable here. But perhaps best to discuss at that other RM. Andrewa ( talk) 21:55, 28 March 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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook