Talk:Choice (publisher)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Outstanding Academic Title page were merged into Choice (publisher) on 5 December 2019. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Proposed merge with Outstanding Academic Title
editThis is just a feature of that publication. DGG ( talk ) 17:04, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Requested move 5 December 2019
edit- 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 discussion.
The result of the move request was: Moved as requested. No objections after two listing periods. (non-admin closure) Surachit (talk) 22:57, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries → Choice Reviews – Per WP:CONCISE. I'm not sure I understand the current title, but there doesn't appear to be any logic to it.. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 00:14, 5 December 2019 (UTC)—Relisted. – Ammarpad (talk) 07:24, 14 December 2019 (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.
Title
editHey @MJL, I see you initated the move to "Choice Reviews" in 2019. I wanted to state that Choice Reviews and Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries are two separate publications owned by Choice,[1] which itself is an imprint of the American Library Association.[2][3]
Now it depends what the scope of this article should be, but if its the publisher itself, I think simply renaming the article Choice (publisher) would be more appropriate, than naming it after either of its publications. Let me know what you think! Cheers :3 F4U (they/it) 14:52, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
- @F4U: Yeah, that would make sense then. The current scope of the article seems to be about the publisher, so I'm fine with a rename to reflect that. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 04:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC)