Talk:Quaestiones Disputatae de Veritate

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 November 2023. The result of the discussion was keep.

Catholicism Low‑importance

Quaestiones Disputatae de Veritate is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Philosophy: Literature / Medieval Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Medieval philosophy

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Requested move 1 November 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved by Uncle G. RM discussions to decide potentially controversial requests is not a place for being bold. It is a place where administrators use their judgment to determine when a request may be closed as a technical request (WP:RMT). This is the opposite of converting contested technical requests to full discussions. In an ideal world, most editors would know the difference. – wbm1058 (talk) 02:09, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Quaestiones Disputatae de Veritate (Thomas Aquinas) → Quaestiones Disputatae de Veritate – There don't seem to be any other works with the title Quaestiones Disputatae de Veritate that have articles on Wikipedia. As such, I don't think that we need to have a parenthetical disambiguator in the article's title, since this is a fairly unambiguous search term. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nomination. Since Quaestiones Disputatae de Veritate redirects to Quaestiones Disputatae de Veritate (Thomas Aquinas), then the parenthetical qualifier "(Thomas Aquinas)" indeed represents unnecessary disambiguation and the matter may well be considered an uncontroversial technical request. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:34, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, this seems to be an undisputed no brainer. Even the article creator wanted it at that title, per Special:Diff/645078095/1182976518. Even the person who nominated it for deletion wants it there. Having a formal requested move discussion about it seems to be a massive overkill. I was just going to boldly do it, at the end of the AFD discussion, until I saw that someone had come along and started a move discussion. Uncle G (talk) 22:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm just going to be bold. I don't foresee anyone reasonably objecting to this, and the target is nothing more than a redirect with zero edits. I pick capital "D" for "Disputatae". It's common (although so is all-lowercase), and what's requested. Uncle G (talk) 22:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Yeah, well there was zero "potential controversy" here. No-one disagreed, and the whole thing was pointless bureaucracy, as is your idea that we pile yet more bureaucracy on top of it to have another request discussed. Project:Be bold is a principle of long standing and goes back to Larry Sanger. Uncle G (talk) 11:37, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Uncle G, so why didn't your "boldness" extend to boldly closing the discussion, like I did? Do you think I'm your clerk? Are you familiar with the WP:RMCI page? wbm1058 (talk) 11:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - No one asked you to do anything, and I left the discussion open in the remote case that Project:Bold, revert, discuss applied. Again, you seem to be focused primarily on bureaucratic niceties. Project:Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. It's you who has decided that you are a clerk. No-one else. Uncle G (talk) 12:22, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Uncle G: what part of "Please do not move this article until the discussion is closed." do you not understand? You care to remove that "bureaucratic nicety" by boldly editing Template:Title notice to remove it? If you think there's a remote case that Project:Bold, revert, discuss applies, then you should leave the discussion open. "WP:DEADLINE", and all. Don't rush to move articles. wbm1058 (talk) 14:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice

The team that worked on this article over the last [casually checks watch] 24 hours (!!) did a very good job articling this encyclopedia article and I am very proud of you all. jengod (talk) 03:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]