Talk:2017–18 in skiing

Requested move 28 August 2018

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: Moved  — Amakuru (talk) 22:09, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

---

• 2018 in skiing → 2017–18 in skiing
• 2017 in skiing → 2016–17 in skiing
• 2016 in skiing → 2015–16 in skiing
• 2015 in skiing → 2014–15 in skiing
• 2014 in skiing → 2013–14 in skiing
• 2013 in skiing → 2012–13 in skiing
• 2012 in skiing → 2011–12 in skiing
• 2011 in skiing → 2010–11 in skiing

– The new article names would reflect the actual content of these pages more accuratly. And this is how the winter sports' calendar is. Pelmeen10 (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

• Come to think of it, it does make sense. I vote "yes" to move the topic name from what is shown now to that better name. Rockies77 (talk) 03:34, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
• I would prefer 2011–2012 or even 2011/2012. Although per MOS:DATERANGE 2011–12 is permissible for consecutive years, I think 2011–2012 is preferred (especially if someone makes "1999–2000 in skiing" article, per WP:CONSISTENCY). A slash could also be used, as these are "special periods" and there are sources that use 2015/2016 for skiing. — bieχχ (talk) 11:11, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
• Comment If these are moved then the current titles should become disambiguation pages (e.g. 2017 in skiing should disambiguate between 2016–17 in skiing and 2017–18 in skiiing, or however the articles end up being titled) or redirect to an index of these articles. Thryduulf (talk) 12:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support but don't create DABs, just leave the resulting redirects (so as to cause minimal breaking of existing incoming external links) and add hatnotes to each. Either dash is acceptable IMO (follow the MOS but I'm not sure it says either way), but the slash is to be avoided owing to confusion with subpages. Andrewa (talk) 10:43, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support in principle, with dashes as proposed. However, a better format would be 2016–17 skiing season as the most commonly used term in practice, and is WP:CONSISTENT with 2016–17 figure skating season, 2016–17 NBA season, and many others in Special:Search/2016–17 season. Also, the proposed YYYY–YY format seems consistent with similar articles. No such user (talk) 11:39, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree. Please consider my !vote in that light. Andrewa (talk) 14:33, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Would it then be obvious that "skiing season" includes snowboarding? The sports (or disciplines) included here are basically the same as International Ski Federation governs +telemark skiiing. --Pelmeen10 (talk) 15:15, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
    • It depends whether "skiing" includes "snowboarding" in any case. I wouldn't know the exact definition, but I would say "yes". Anyway, article titles are not the place to narrowly define article scope: it's sufficient to start the article along the lines of The following events in [International Ski Federation]] sports (alpine skiing, nordic skiing, snowboarding...) marked the 2016–17 season... No such user (talk) 05:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

---

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.

Would someone familiar with this topic (Amakuru?) please fix the errors shown in the infobox of most of the above articles (all but the first two). Johnuniq (talk) 23:46, 10 September 2018 (UTC)