Category talk:Women supercentenarians

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Oculi in topic Opposed speedy move request

Opposed speedy move request

edit
  • @Fayenatic london: that discussion went in a completely different direction, is it really necessary to hold up this speedy nomination because of that discussion? Marcocapelle (talk) 13:17, 24 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    • Yes. Since multiple contributors said the current names pose no grammatical problem, they cannot be "obvious grammatical errors", so C2A can't be used to "correct" them. Moreover, some other names were suggested, but the new names proposed here were not. Speedy renaming can sometimes be acceptable after a full CFD, but it would require a fresh argument, not just "Grammar". – Fayenatic London 14:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
      • My argument is really just that--grammar--but I don't see a problem in discussing it. That CFD was about a different proposal, though, to switch men/women to male/female in cat names, with the obvious implications in the whole gender vs. sex debate. I'm afraid the arguments there for grammatical correctness of wo/men centenarians are both unfounded, as grammatical correctness is not defined by common use (e.g. yous feel me?), and inapplicable: driver is a noun; centenarian and supercentenarian are adjectives. Wo/men super/centenarian is just a bad translation from Spanish (or any other romantic language). — Guarapiranga  16:32, 25 June 2022 (UTC)Reply