Talk:Communes of Luxembourg
 | Luxembourg B‑class Top‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
106 Communes as of 2012
List
|
|---|
|
Requested move 29 October 2017
 | The request to rename this article to Communes of Luxembourg has been carried out.
If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag. |
Municipalities of Luxembourg → Communes of Luxembourg – The text of this page was changed from "communes" to "municipalities" by a WP:SPA, ALLofME (talk · contribs). [1] That same user also nominated the page at WP:RM/TR for moving to Municipalities of Luxembourg with the justification:
- "Communes" is French, the official English term as used by the Luxembourg government is municipality: http://www.statistiques.public.lu/stat/TableViewer/document.aspx?ReportId=12704&IF_Language=eng&MainTheme=1&FldrName=1
Now an IP account 77.179.86.68 has listed the category for renaming. The IP range points to the identify of the nominator as user:Tobias Conradi who is blocked on Wikipedia.
- Evidence? 85.178.112.88 (talk) 15:31, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
I have no axe to grind either way, but the move needs to be reviewed by a full RM discussion. – Fayenatic London 08:32, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment User:Fayenatic london - if you find nothing that was wrong with the move to "Municipalities of Luxembourg" carried out by User:Station1, then it is disruptive to propose to move it to "Communes of Luxembourg". 85.178.112.88 (talk) 15:29, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- Evidence of WP:SOCK: (i) Two other 77.179... IP addresses from Telefonica Germany were included in the last batch of socks blocked at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Tobias_Conradi/Archive#27_October_2017. (ii) Pattern of editing: the first and only edits from this address dived straight in with nominations using somewhat arcane Wikipedia procedures.
- As I attempted to make clear above, I am not actually seeking a move back to the old name, but ensuring that a full discussion is held on the name, rather than allowing technical procedures to be used for one renaming after another without full examination of the merits of the case. – Fayenatic London 16:29, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- RE "(i)" - how is being included in a batch evidence for a relation to Tobias Conradi? Or is it, because Tobias Conradi is related to Berlin and edited geography items all around the world (5 March 2005 he started Wikipedia:WikiProject Country subdivisions) and was concerned with application of WP:UE and naming consistency, that any IP being related to Berlin, and also editing towards naming consistency and enforcing WP policies is accused of being used by Tobias Conradi? So, any edits in conformance with WP policies are now reverted, even if errors are re-introduced? WP:VANDAL: "On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose".
- RE "(ii)" - nothing arcane, if one wants to rename a page these rules are easily found. 77.179.110.153 (talk) 04:29, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Opppose Per WP:UE and official name. Note that French is only one of the languages frequently used in Luxembourg. 85.178.112.88 (talk) 15:30, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I have moved the page back to the previous version, at which it was stable for 12 years. ALLofME (talk · contribs) should not have used WP:RMTR which is for "Uncontroversial technical requests" and instead commenced their own RM. The activity from certain IPs and new users is highly suspicious and suggests experienced trolls. AusLondonder (talk) 17:53, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- User:AusLondonder - You violated WP rules with moving the page during an on-going discussion. The move by ALLofME was not contested for several months. You ridicule WP policies and guidelines. WP:UE, WP:BOLD, WP:FIXIT. Calling new users and IPs troll violates WP:CIV. 77.179.110.153 (talk) 04:10, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Proposing a move from Communes of Luxembourg (stable for 12 years) to Municipalities of Luxembourg as an "uncontroversial technical request" was the undiscussed move. I am reverting to the stable version from which it was moved without discussion nor consensus. If you would like to move the page, please start a RM. AusLondonder (talk) 09:47, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Requested move 31 October 2017
| It has been proposed in this section that Communes of Luxembourg be renamed and moved to Municipalities of Luxembourg. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. |
Communes of Luxembourg → Municipalities of Luxembourg – Move was carried out during an on-going move discussion. The former move to Municipalities of Luxembourg was well explained, based on WP:UE and not contested until User:Fayenatic london made up a relation between the move proposer User:ALLofME and User:Tobias Conradi. The behavior by User:Fayenatic london (proposing the move back to French terminology) and User:AusLondonder (carrying out the move back to French terminology) is forbidden per WP:POINT "Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point". 77.179.110.153 (talk) 04:40, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:13, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose As already stated, this is not a technical request and serious concerns have been raised by well-regarded editors about sockpupperty. The original move from Communes of Luxembourg (stable for 12 years) to Municipalities of Luxembourg was the undiscussed move, incorrectly labelled as an "uncontroversial technical request". AusLondonder (talk) 09:45, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- And the move itself is problematic because...sockpuppetry allegations? Or is it just because Luxembourg calls their municipalities "communes"? I guess I'm missing the point here. ToThAc (talk) 13:00, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- It needs discussion to form a consensus as is the usual practice for moving articles. This is not an uncontroversial technical request by any stretch of the imagination. I and other editors oppose the move on several grounds. AusLondonder (talk) 14:06, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- @AusLondonder, ToThAc, and 77.179.110.153: queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:14, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- User:Anthony Appleyard did you see that above on this page there was a move discussion and that User:AusLondonder disruptively moved the article while the discussion was still going on? The technical request by 77.179.110.153 was made on that ground [2]. AusLondonder misrepresented the case by claiming "incorrectly labelled as an "uncontroversial technical request"" and "serious concerns have been raised by well-regarded editors about sockpupperty" - but no such "serious concerns" "by well-regarded editors about sockpupperty" can be found.
- Comment Now this has been moved here I will reiterate my opposition on several grounds. Firstly, per WP:TITLECHANGES ("If an article title has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed") - the page has been stable at the present title for 12 years. Secondly, no actual credible reason has been presented for a move. The only rationale presented is WP:UE but no explanation is given how it applies here. Apparently some editors are unaware "commune" is an English-language word. AusLondonder (talk) 14:22, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- The request was not made on the basis of WP:UE, but on procedural ground and it was placed in the section "Requests to revert undiscussed moves". Your move was undiscussed and you were aware that it is controversial. 77.179.131.232 (talk) 18:18, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. Another instance of WP:UE being misinterpreted. It does not say or mean that we should translate absolutely everything. "Communes" as used in French-speaking countries is not generally translated in English-language sources produced in English-speaking countries. Its meaning is well understood everywhere. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:51, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- User:Necrothesp : did you bother to check the sources before spreading your allegations of "WP:UE being misinterpreted"?
- http://www.statistiques.public.lu/stat/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=12700&IF_Language=eng&MainTheme=1&FldrName=1
- http://www.statistiques.public.lu/stat/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=12701&IF_Language=eng&MainTheme=1&FldrName=1
- http://www.statistiques.public.lu/stat/TableViewer/document.aspx?ReportId=12704&IF_Language=eng&MainTheme=1&FldrName=1
- http://www.luxembourg.public.lu/de/le-grand-duche-se-presente/systeme-politique/territoire/communes/index.html
- How did you categorize Luxembourg as French-speaking country when the national language is Luxembourgish and there are three administrative languages? What about "municipality" inside "public.lu" (https://www.google.com/search?q=municipality+site%3Apublic.lu) ? Dumb Luxembourgers that don't have your wisdom and don't know how to write in English? 77.179.131.232 (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- User:Necrothesp : did you bother to check the sources before spreading your allegations of "WP:UE being misinterpreted"?
- Comment - The request by 77.179.110.153 was a request to revert the controversial move by User:AusLondonder which s/he carried out single-handed during an on-going move discussion. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Technical_requests&oldid=807981413 77.179.131.232 (talk) 18:05, 2 November 2017 (UTC)