Wikipedia

Talk:Cowper ministry (1856)

Latest comment: 8 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Move discussion in progress

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Baird ministry (2014–2015) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:31, 4 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 23 March 2016

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion
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: No consensus to move. This has been here a while now, and there is not a consensus here that moving to ordinals would be more helpful for years. It was suggested in the conversation that months can be used where year disambiguation is not precise enough. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 18:34, 9 April 2016 (UTC)Reply


– This has been discussed before (e.g. here), but nothing came of it, and a new discussion is needed. The problem with the year-range disambiguation is that more than one government headed by the same person could be both formed and dissolved the same year. That would require the name of a month in the dab. Also, people may not necessarily remember governments by the exact years of their existence, in particular when there are several in just a few years. I think people rather remember them by their ordinal number (if at all ... ), i.e. the WP:COMMONNAME rule would apply. I'll start with this set of articles. If the move goes through, the rest can be moved one by one. HandsomeFella (talk) 14:36, 23 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

  • Question – Is this problem of multiple ministries in the same year just hypothetical? Or rare? Is there a problem you're trying to solve here? Seems like a hard way to do so, and having the years seems more informative. Nobody is going to remember these ordinals either, I'd bet. Dicklyon (talk) 05:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • In Category:New South Wales ministries, there are six Askin–Cutler ministries, all in just a few years. The fourth was dissolved in 1973, the fifth was formed and dissolved in 1973, and the sixth was formed in 1973. I'm not aware of any month-year disambiguation anywhere, but I haven't checked all possible categories. But why not switch to something that is sustainable over time? There can be only one "first"; there will not be any ties. And if there would be, for instance, a "First Cowper ministry" in Victoria, I think "(Victoria)" would be a better disambiguator.
  • I guess you could be right on whether people will remember the ordinals, but if an Askin–Cutler ministry did something in 1973, then it could be of interest which one.
  • It can also be noted that the article about current ministry for NSW is called Second Baird ministry.
  • Cheers. HandsomeFella (talk) 09:02, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment. I'm skeptical as well. If the ordinals are truly what scholarly works use and people are familiar with them, fine, but I kind of doubt it. Years are explanatory and clear, especially when there's more than two or three, and actually seem more "sustainable over time" to me. If month disambiguation is needed, so be it, although if there was really such a fast succession of ministries, it seems likely that this is a strong candidate for merging into one article anyway with appropriately named redirects - something like Year of the Four Emperors, as I doubt any one government would do enough to fill a full-length article. SnowFire (talk) 18:09, 24 March 2016 (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.
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cowper ministry (1856). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:05, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cowper_ministry_(1856)&oldid=1200081731"