![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() Archives ( Index) |
This page is archived by
ClueBot III.
|
The result of the move request was: procedural close as no consensus. Discussion has ranged over multiple pages with various suggestions. This one hasn't gained consensus. DrKiernan ( talk) 13:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
S.A. (corporation) → Corporations under civil law – This is not specifically about S.A.'s, this is about corporations as formulated under civil law in general. --Relisted. George Ho ( talk) 03:11, 12 June 2015 (UTC) -- 70.51.46.11 ( talk) 07:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.s.p.A. and S.P.A. are up for discussion at WP:Redirects for discussion. User:70.51.46.11, a regular there (as I am), kindly referred to this RM, and I am linking back to that with similar courtesy. I don't really want to split the discussion, but of course the redirects will follow the move, that is the correct master/slave relationship.
I feel that the proposed title is far too vague.
S.A. currently redirects to the DAB at
SA, which doesn't even mention it. (Of course, I could
WP:BOLDly add it, but don't like to do so when things are under discussion: patently I think we would all agree it should be at that DAB, whatever its eventual title is.) But I think it would be better to move it over the redirect at S.Ato
Société AnonymeStruck and changed by
Si Trew (
talk). Obviously we need to do a lot of tidying up with this one, but I don't see why it needs to have the "(corporation)" when
S.A. is going spare. In any event, it should at least, I think, be listed at the DAB. In the meantime, I will mark it as {{
R from other punctuation}}
, without prejudice to this discussion or the one I shall start on RfD -- I don't like to split discussions but this is a bit of a rat's nest, we'll get there together, I'm sure.
Si Trew (
talk) 09:05, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
R from title without diacritics}}
at redirect
Societe Anonyme, and {{
R from initialism}}
at
S.A.. A bot will tie up the double redirects, wherever we put it, but it is a
WP:SURPRISE and
WP:RFD#D2 "may cause confusion" for that redirect to go to a DAB that doesn't mention it.
Si Trew (
talk) 09:19, 4 June 2015 (UTC)The result of the move request was: not moved. DrKiernan ( talk) 13:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
S.A. (corporation) → S.A. The discussion immediately above this, from 70.51, a regular at WP:RFD refers to, is also listed there but now closed. Since that is now not in the way, I still propose that this be moved over. SA without the punctuation is maybe a step too far, but S.A. with the punc I think is fine to move over and we don't need to DAB it with the parenthetical (corporation). @ BDD: may think otherwise, though. Si Trew ( talk) 07:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Grammatically speaking, this is a classic "whoever" vs. "whomever" dilemma. Personally, however, and for what it is worth, I incline to the former usage of those two. Toddcs ( talk) 15:29, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() Archives ( Index) |
This page is archived by
ClueBot III.
|
The result of the move request was: procedural close as no consensus. Discussion has ranged over multiple pages with various suggestions. This one hasn't gained consensus. DrKiernan ( talk) 13:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
S.A. (corporation) → Corporations under civil law – This is not specifically about S.A.'s, this is about corporations as formulated under civil law in general. --Relisted. George Ho ( talk) 03:11, 12 June 2015 (UTC) -- 70.51.46.11 ( talk) 07:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.s.p.A. and S.P.A. are up for discussion at WP:Redirects for discussion. User:70.51.46.11, a regular there (as I am), kindly referred to this RM, and I am linking back to that with similar courtesy. I don't really want to split the discussion, but of course the redirects will follow the move, that is the correct master/slave relationship.
I feel that the proposed title is far too vague.
S.A. currently redirects to the DAB at
SA, which doesn't even mention it. (Of course, I could
WP:BOLDly add it, but don't like to do so when things are under discussion: patently I think we would all agree it should be at that DAB, whatever its eventual title is.) But I think it would be better to move it over the redirect at S.Ato
Société AnonymeStruck and changed by
Si Trew (
talk). Obviously we need to do a lot of tidying up with this one, but I don't see why it needs to have the "(corporation)" when
S.A. is going spare. In any event, it should at least, I think, be listed at the DAB. In the meantime, I will mark it as {{
R from other punctuation}}
, without prejudice to this discussion or the one I shall start on RfD -- I don't like to split discussions but this is a bit of a rat's nest, we'll get there together, I'm sure.
Si Trew (
talk) 09:05, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
R from title without diacritics}}
at redirect
Societe Anonyme, and {{
R from initialism}}
at
S.A.. A bot will tie up the double redirects, wherever we put it, but it is a
WP:SURPRISE and
WP:RFD#D2 "may cause confusion" for that redirect to go to a DAB that doesn't mention it.
Si Trew (
talk) 09:19, 4 June 2015 (UTC)The result of the move request was: not moved. DrKiernan ( talk) 13:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
S.A. (corporation) → S.A. The discussion immediately above this, from 70.51, a regular at WP:RFD refers to, is also listed there but now closed. Since that is now not in the way, I still propose that this be moved over. SA without the punctuation is maybe a step too far, but S.A. with the punc I think is fine to move over and we don't need to DAB it with the parenthetical (corporation). @ BDD: may think otherwise, though. Si Trew ( talk) 07:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Grammatically speaking, this is a classic "whoever" vs. "whomever" dilemma. Personally, however, and for what it is worth, I incline to the former usage of those two. Toddcs ( talk) 15:29, 9 November 2023 (UTC)