Talk:Easter Crisis
![]() | Denmark Start‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
![]() | Politics Stub‑class | |||||||||
|
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Easter Crisis of 1920. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101125000024/http://kongehuset.dk/publish.php?dogtag=k_en_his_chrx to http://kongehuset.dk/publish.php?dogtag=k_en_his_chrx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Requested move 7 June 2020
![]() | The request to rename this article to Easter Crisis 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. |
Easter Crisis of 1920 → Easter Crisis – Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:NOYEAR. The disambiguation page currently located at Easter Crisis refers to the 1920 and the 1948 crisis, who both took place in Denmark. When someone say "The Easter Crisis", they are almost always referring to the 1920 crisis, as it have paramount influence on the constitutional order in Denmark. Almost everybody in Denmark have heard of the 1920 crisis; few have heard about the 1948 crisis. The pageviews are also telling. When this page is the primary topic, we can apply WP:NOYEAR and drop the year in the title of this page (i.e., not only make Easter Crisis into a redirect). The 1948 crisis should instead be referenced in a hatnote. ― Hebsen (talk) 21:23, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
OpposeNeutral – the requested move is malformed, since the target is taken (by a disambig page). I'd say leave it. Disambiguation is a good thing. Dicklyon (talk) 02:51, 8 June 2020 (UTC)- Dicklyon So how should the request be made? I am proposing we delete the disambiguation page, as with only two entries, hatnotes are more effective. ― Hebsen (talk) 12:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Generally if your intended target page is taken, you make a multi-move proposal to say where to move it. Or if you mean to just overwrite it, say so explicitly (I guess you implied that by your hatnote mention). Currently your proposal is listed at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Possibly_incomplete_requests, which is why I noticed it. I don't know if there's a way to avoid that when proposing to just overwrite the target disambig page. I'll stay neutral. Dicklyon (talk) 15:21, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. I will try to fix the listing. ― Hebsen (talk) 15:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Generally if your intended target page is taken, you make a multi-move proposal to say where to move it. Or if you mean to just overwrite it, say so explicitly (I guess you implied that by your hatnote mention). Currently your proposal is listed at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Possibly_incomplete_requests, which is why I noticed it. I don't know if there's a way to avoid that when proposing to just overwrite the target disambig page. I'll stay neutral. Dicklyon (talk) 15:21, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Dicklyon So how should the request be made? I am proposing we delete the disambiguation page, as with only two entries, hatnotes are more effective. ― Hebsen (talk) 12:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)