Talk:Act of 5th November

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ordinal dates

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. We would need sources that show this is not the correct historical name or definitive sources to show that it has a different name. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Act of 5th November → Act of 5 November — relisted Dpmuk (talk) 12:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC) Move request started by User:Ohconfucius. 08:48, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Although the current title uses a date format contrary to wikipedia convention I think treating this purely as a date format issue is wrong as it's an article title. As such I think WP:COMMONNAME should apply and if "5th" is the common name it should stay. I'm not an expert on the subject and google searches aren't helping much and so I would like more information on the common name from more knowledgeable editors before supporting or opposing this move. Dpmuk (talk) 10:07, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support "Act of 5th November" is bad English ("Act of the 5th of November" would be better English) 65.93.12.93 (talk) 04:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. It doesn't matter what is "good" or "bad" English, what is relevant under Wikipedia official policy is what is used. No evidence has been presented that there's any problem with the current title. Andrewa (talk) 11:05, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, Act of November 5 seems to be just about the most common variant on Google Books.--Kotniski (talk) 14:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And, for what it's worth. the guideline in question has an explicit exception for dates used in historic names, like the Seventh of March Speech, which is normally so spelled. This would appear to be another example, with a different historic format. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:43, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.