Talk:2015 Kundby bomb plot
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2015 Kundby bomb plot 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 |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 3 June 2017. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Denmark may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
rename
editSuggest rename to 2015 Kundby bomb plot.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:50, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Agree with the suggestion by User:E.M.Gregory.--Rævhuld (talk) 14:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Requested move 4 June 2017
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Consensus did not form around the alternative suggestion, while there was broad support for a move and most participants were fine with the suggested title and argued for it in line with consistency, which conforms with policy. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 04:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Kundby case → 2015 Kundby bomb plot – Consistency in name giving Rævhuld (talk) 21:29, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- @E.M.Gregory and Rævhuld: I think the newly suggested name is not grammatically appropriate. —usernamekiran(talk) 21:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: I am not a native speaker, so I can't see any grammatically mistake. Could you please explain what you mean? Thanks. <3--Rævhuld (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Kundby 2016 bombing plan; or Kundby 2016 bombing attempt. I think new name should be discussed with a few users. —usernamekiran(talk) 21:52, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- It's a pretty standard usage 1973 New York City bomb plot, 2005 Los Angeles bomb plot, 2010 Portland car bomb plot, 2007 bomb plot in Germany.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:01, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: I am not a native speaker, so I can't see any grammatically mistake. Could you please explain what you mean? Thanks. <3--Rævhuld (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Ah, I do see your point, User:Usernamekiran, Kundby 2016 bombing plan; or Kundby 2016 bombing attempt both sound fine to me.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Wasn't it 2015? And aren't the rest of the articles written like Year Town Event?--Rævhuld (talk) 00:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Support per nominator. Debresser (talk) 16:24, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Support Kundby case is absurdly vague, on top of which it doesn't even accurately describe the article El cid, el campeador (talk) 18:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose rename it to "2016 Kundby bombing plan"; or "2016 Kundby bombing attempt". —usernamekiran(talk) 22:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
- Support move to 2015 Kundby bomb plot: clearer and standard-format title. PamD 23:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
- @PamD: "2015 Kundby bombing plot" is much better than "bomb plot". —usernamekiran(talk) 00:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
{{hat|Please move the article}} @E.M.Gregory, El cid, el campeador, PamD, Usernamekiran, and Pppery: Can anyone of you please move the article? I mean, we have discussed it since the 4th og July and only one was against it and 5 (?) for the move. So please move the article. Thanks <3 {{hab}}
- @Rævhuld: an editor involved in the discussion cant close it. No matter how clear the consensus is. Also, pings do not work if you dont put the tildes in. Pinging @E.M.Gregory, El cid, el campeador, PamD, and Pppery: I still stand by "2016 Kundby bombing plan"; or "2016 Kundby bombing attempt". —usernamekiran(talk) 03:57, 17 June 2017 (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.
New name
editI think the article should be renamed to "2016 Kundby bomb plot". I was planned to be carried out in 2016 and she was also arrested in 2016. Doesn't 2016 make more sense?--Marginataen (talk) 12:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)