Talk:Edwin B. Winans (United States Army officer)
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Favonian in topic Requested move
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Edwin B. Winans (United States Army officer) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move
edit- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 14:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Edwin B. Winans (general) → Edwin B. Winans (U.S. Army general) – Please make this move so that General Edwin B. Winans' article will be returned to where it once was before an unnecessary and disruptive move was made to this page. The move caused many links to stop working, since the person who made that move failed to clean up behind himself. DutchmanInDisguise (talk) 14:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
The first time I submitted this request, it was incorrect because of my sloppy typing; I subsequently inserted the missing parenthesis. Sorry to cause this confusion! DutchmanInDisguise (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- I've returned the article to the location it occupied when the RM was inputted. It should remain here until the RM is closed. I can't say I understand the opposition. I don't see the full (U.S. Army general) qualifier as necessary. I briefly browsed through Category:United_States_Army_generals and it appeared that the (general) qualifier was the most common.--Labattblueboy (talk) 17:23, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose, WP:Overprecision. Though I think the reverted move would have been acceptable under WP:BRD even though it was currently under discussion. 18:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose - disambiguations should be as simple as possible, so in the absence of another, non-US, general called Edwin B. Winans, further disambiguation is unnecessary. – ukexpat (talk) 18:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. Overly precise and therefore not concise. Jenks24 (talk) 22:51, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. The current disambiguation is perfectly adequate and the original move was entirely correct. -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:54, 4 August 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.