This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Serbia鈥揝outh Africa relations article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result of the move request was: moved. South Africa and Serbia are equally covered in the article and so the rationale "the more commonly encountered concept explored in the article" is unconvincing. On exclusion of wikipedia mirrors, ghits results do not help in deciding between the two forms. If the project style guide is uniformly applied then the suggested target page is more inline with the article titles policy as it will be more compliant with the consistency criterion. DrKiernan ( talk) 15:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
South Africa鈥揝erbia relations 鈫 Serbia鈥揝outh Africa relations 鈥 Guidelines say that entities should be in alphabetical order. I added a db-g6 to the redirect, but that was removed 鈥 and the redirect was changed from redirecting to Foreign relations of Serbia to redirecting to this page ( South Africa鈥揝erbia relations) 鈥 by Panyd with the edit summary "Zero discussion on the matter and looking at the article it appears that South Africa is the the more commonly encountered concept explored in the article". Starting this thread to have a full discussion. HandsomeFella ( talk) 15:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Serbia鈥揝outh Africa relations article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result of the move request was: moved. South Africa and Serbia are equally covered in the article and so the rationale "the more commonly encountered concept explored in the article" is unconvincing. On exclusion of wikipedia mirrors, ghits results do not help in deciding between the two forms. If the project style guide is uniformly applied then the suggested target page is more inline with the article titles policy as it will be more compliant with the consistency criterion. DrKiernan ( talk) 15:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
South Africa鈥揝erbia relations 鈫 Serbia鈥揝outh Africa relations 鈥 Guidelines say that entities should be in alphabetical order. I added a db-g6 to the redirect, but that was removed 鈥 and the redirect was changed from redirecting to Foreign relations of Serbia to redirecting to this page ( South Africa鈥揝erbia relations) 鈥 by Panyd with the edit summary "Zero discussion on the matter and looking at the article it appears that South Africa is the the more commonly encountered concept explored in the article". Starting this thread to have a full discussion. HandsomeFella ( talk) 15:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC)