Talk:Spanish Revolution

Timpo (talk) 10:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 September 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. The consensus is the 1936 revolution is the primary topic. Might be worthwhile starting an RM there about moving that article back to simply Spanish Revolution. Jenks24 (talk) 00:13, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish revolution (disambiguation) → Spanish Revolution – Per other disambiguation pages (Chinese Revolution, Egyptian Revolution, Ethiopian Revolution, Hungarian Revolution, Indonesian Revolution, Iraqi Revolution, Korean Revolution, Libyan Revolution, Mongolian Revolution, Portuguese Revolution, Syrian Revolution, Ukrainian Revolution, Venezuelan Revolution, ect.). Charles Essie (talk) 22:39, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. As usual 'consistency' means very little for disambiguation pages as it's fully expected and common for similar topics to have starkly non-similar name problems. Mercury is a disambiguation page, Jupiter is not, and that is acceptable. The actual criteria for a move would be that the current redirect - which nominator did not comment on - is ~50%+ of the page views of the other relevant options. First of all, some of these options should probably be removed from the page as nobody calls them "Spanish Revolution" (e.g. the revolution of 1810... wut?). The only ones which appear relevant to me are Spanish Revolution of 1845 (no views, tiny stub) and Glorious Revolution (Spain) http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Glorious_Revolution_(Spain) , which has ~100 views a day, but is also rarely referred to as only "Spanish Revolution." The current redirect to Spanish Revolution of 1936 is also ~100 views a day at [[1]] . Anyway, it can go either way, but I'd be inclined to discount almost all of the other options as being basically never referred to as the Spanish Revolution (1973) or rarely (Glorious), while that is the term used for the 1936 one. So... still oppose after actually checking the relevant criteria. SnowFire (talk) 00:51, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The primary meaning of the term "Spanish Revolution" is that of 1936. That of 1868 is the Gloriosa and the others are minor. Some of those disambiguation pages seem out of place, too; notably Indonesian Revolution, which I think ought to redirect to Indonesian National Revolution. —Srnec (talk) 02:10, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Indonesian Revolution (Which used to redirect anyway) and possibly Korean Revolution should probably be turned once more into redirects. In addition... @Charles Essie:, please read MOS:DAB, your style is not the style recommended for disambig pages, since I see you've edited many of those other pages into the current form. Don't pipe the article, there's no need for "The", and do include a brief explanation of what each topic actually is. Closer to what this old version of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chinese_Revolution&oldid=405095560 Chinese Revolution, not the version that removed the explanations and added "thes." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chinese_Revolution&oldid=584295100 ) SnowFire (talk) 20:57, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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