This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is part of WikiProject Gender Studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Hi, is there any reason that this page needs to go through a consensus process to be moved? Or any reason that it needs to be moved? How about just doing a redirect? An An 02:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I see no real reason for it to be moved as it already sufficiently disambiguated from W.I.T.C.H. - perhaps the proposer would like to open discussion as to why this page should be moved? --Lox (t,c) 12:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I've taken down the move request because: (1) It wasn't properly formed. Nothing was noted at Wikipedia:Requested_moves, so no discussion has taken place at all; and (2) and there's been no response about why it should be moved. I hope that's OK. AnAn 00:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course! I was going to remove it myself since I didn't see any discussion forthcoming from the proposer! --Lox (t,c) 07:57, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
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 Move. WP:NCA states a guideline with an exception, "Avoid the use of acronyms in page naming unless the term you are naming is almost exclusively known only by its acronyms and is widely known and used in that form". This does not qualify under the exception stated. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
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.
For some reason the article page is not showing up correctly. I;ve been through the edit page but cant see anything odd. All other wikipedia pages are showing up fine. Can other people see it OK? 126.96.36.199 20:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to know since when were decisions allowed to be made with no consensus? If you look at that "debate" above there was no consensus but merely TWO people making OPPOSITE statements that is NOT consensus by any stretch of the imagination... --188.8.131.52 (talk) 17:48, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
btw yes I know it was a long time ago and the results aren't the important thing it is people's disregard for the rules going on here could have just been the earlier in a trend where it is actually making a bigger impact now. --184.108.40.206 (talk) 17:51, 25 August 2011 (UTC)