Talk:Common market

Unsectioned comment

Several trade related articles link to this, and while it is very similar to a Single market (which is one of the articles linking to this and why I didn't revert to the previous redirect. I don't know much about policy here but circular links should probably be avoided) many articles linking here or to Common Market (in the economic sense) make no mention of Single market. Although finding a hip hop group linked to from an economic or politcal article is certainly amusing, I don't think it's what people following those links are looking for. Rhinopig 20:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate 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.

The result of the debate was Not moved: The economic meaning is the predominant use of this term and therefore belongs at the undisambiguated title. Moving the newly created article about the band to Common Market (band) and redirecting Common Market here with a disambiguation note at the top of this page is the appropriate outcome per policy, long-standing practice, and facility for most readers. —Centrx→talk • 02:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Common market → Common market (Economics) – Common market → Common market (Economics) … Rationale: The only thing currently separating the economic term and the name of a music group (Common Market) is a capital letter and this appears to cause confusion and leads to trouble when using the "back" or "forward" buttons of internet explorer (explorer just skips over one article or the other). I think they should both be changed so that the music group goes from Common Market → Common Market (Music) … Please share your opinion at Talk:Common market -- 208.131.183.198 17:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Support moving both to Common Market (Economics) and Common Market (Music). 208.131.183.198 17:35, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Using only the capitalization difference is a common practice for disambiguation. I also don't think this article should have capitalized "market", and the dab templates at top take care about possible confusion (which is unlikely). Besides, the proposed titles don't follow WP:NC (if anything, it should be Common market (economics) and Common Market (band), but I don't see the real need for that). Duja 09:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(vote withdrawn according to talk. Duja 08:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Discussion

Since the term "Common Market" is probably better known in an economic sense, then this is why I think that both pages should be renamed, so that there wouldn't appear to be any bias in favour of music groups. However, if one page is renamed, then that should be sufficient to at least prevent errors occurring when using internet explorer and when wiki-linking to either one page or the other.208.131.183.198 17:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also suggest using "Common Market (Music)" for the music group, and Common market, Common Market to be redirects to the economics article about the topic - Single market. Wheter the economics article should be named "Common market" or "Single market" is another thing. Single market was the first name of the article, that is why currently "common market" redirects there. But it can be the other way around, eg. "single market" redirecting to "common market". Alinor 17:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the article on Single Market seems to define it as a more advanced form of a Common Market. Thus it seems that the terms are separate, but closely related. Hmmm...perhaps this should be a multiple page move then? I'll put a link on the music group page to share the discussion at this page.208.131.183.198 17:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is too small (see Talk:Single market), so practicaly the terms are interchangable and thus should be at the same page. Alinor 20:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alinor, I undid your redirect. I didn't do it out of spite, I just though it best to keep the page as it was when the request was made. After people have had enough time to come to a decision about both pages, then there could be a discussion about merging (not redirecting since in doing so all the info on the common market page is lost) common market and single market.208.131.183.198 18:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the info from the old common market page is already included in the single market page (see Talk:Single market). Alinor 20:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, didn't realize it had been included, but the page should still be kept until the survey is completed. As for a common market being the same as a single market, I have my doubts since the EEC went from establishing a common market to a single market (as exemplified on this website: http://www.karl.aegee.org/oem/articles/lessons.htm) and CARICOM also went from Common Market to Single Market. Also the Oxford English Dictionary has separately defined entries for "common market" and "single market". These two entries are given full definitions instead of having "common market" defined fully and then having the entry for single market as "single market. n. a common market" (unlike its entries for "ermine" and "stoat" for example where an ermine (the animal) is just simply "a stoat").72.27.5.144 04:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Duja, I looked at Wikipedia:Disambiguation and I can't find anything about using capitalization differences. And even if capitalization difference is an accepted de facto disambiguation practice it still leads to problems when moving between pages in Internet Explorer. You can see and try it for yourself: just go from Wikipedia Main Page → Common market→ Common Market→ any other page. Then use the "back" button on Internet Explorer and you will see that one of the "common market" pages will automatically be skipped every time. Even if Wikipedians recognize capitalization difference, it doesn't mean Internet Explorer does (and one reason I suggested the move was because I've seen instances where a link was written as Common Market which was obviously intended for Common market. I have no problem with Common Market (economics) or Common market (economics) (since I don't think capitalization should be used to distinguish the two terms anyway) and since neither Common Market (Music) nor Common Market (band) exist it should be no problem to use your suggestion instead.72.27.5.144 04:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I said "common practice". However, having said that, I must admit that I'm having problems finding a precedent :-D, so I might be wrong after all. I also verified the IE problem you described. Since it's not a big deal anyway (and I stumbled upon this vote rather than being actively interested in the subject), I'll scratch my vote and let the more informed ones to decide. Duja
So, do we have a conclusion now? Should we move the music group to "Common Market (Music)"? Should we redirect Common Market to the economics article? Or something else? Alinor 20:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

I came here looking for the music group. What happened to that page? Cuñado - Talk 05:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]