Talk:Directive 89/391/EEC

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union 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.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupational Safety and Health Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health 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.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Attribution and move

I rewrote this article from scratch, without input from the useless stub that was Workplace Health and Safety Directive. Why would that require complicated moving and attribution? The only sources are on the page. Hekerui (talk) 11:50, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution for an article should be kept on the same page. Doesn't matter if you change one letter or every word, doesn't matter if the previous efforts were useless stubs. Just move it properly instead of getting into an edit war. Lithopsian (talk) 14:07, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why should attribution be given in Directive 89/391/EEC to this article? I did not edit this article, I edited Directive 89/391/EEC and used nothing of this article. Hekerui (talk) 14:11, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I insert my changes to article Directive 89/391/EEC as seen here into this article and then move this article to Directive 89/391/EEC, will I be reverted? There is no reasoning behind doing it like that because I use nothing of this article - even the name is a mystery because it's not official - but it's annoying to not be allowed to contribute content due to misunderstanding of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Please respond. Hekerui (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Forget licenses, edit away (but in your own words). Just make sure if you want to change the article title, then rename it properly. You probably won't be able to do this yourself now since the redirect where you want to rename has been edited and reverted. So you'll have to make a move request for an admin to do it. Technical requests will happen quickly, but will be reversed if someone disagrees with the name change. A better way is to start a discussion (instructions at the link) and then an admin will decide at the end of the discussion whether to change the name or not. You can continue to edit the article while the discussion is underway. Lithopsian (talk) 16:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hekerui Or you can move the page properly first (not copy paste) and then make the changes. What you should not do is create a topic on the same subject with just a title change like you did. It is disruptive and not helpful. Your title I think is marginally better than the original so I don't it is a problem but others may disagree.PRehse (talk) 15:58, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 January 2019

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 section.

Moved. Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy New Year! (nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed. ^put'r there 17:55, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Workplace Health and Safety Directive → Directive 89/391/EEC – The article title is not found in the legislation (unlike, for example, Regulation (EU) 2016/679) and individual directives based on this legal act refer to it as Directive 89/391/EEC. Hekerui (talk) 16:50, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Standard practice for EU (and indeed all) legislation: use the unambiguous and official title. Narky Blert (talk) 13:41, 9 January 2019 (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.