Talk:Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Hating America: The New World Sport which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:01, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 9 September 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: Consensus to not move, therefore, not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 22:08, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

---

Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe → Nuclear Terrorism – Per WP:SUBTITLE and WP:DIFFCAPS. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 07:39, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:34, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

• The name "Nuclear Terrorism" by itself looks more like an article about nuclear terrorism than an article about a book. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:34, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

@Anthony Appleyard: Couldn't that be said of most any application of WP:DIFFCAPS? 142.160.89.97 (talk) 20:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose - this book is definitely not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "Nuclear Terrorism". As past experience with your nominations have shown, you are going to keep on asking so here: I WP:IAR WP:SMALLDETAILS as that is, and always will be, a garbage guideline. No reader will even give it one thought how he wrote it, as caps don't matter in almost anywhere regular users are concerned and it's stupid to think Wikipedia should be otherwise. --Gonnym (talk) 10:39, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

this book is definitely not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "Nuclear Terrorism". Why, bearing in mind WP:DIFFCAPS?

WP:IAR WP:SMALLDETAILS as that is, and always will be, a garbage guideline. No reader will even give it one thought how he wrote it, as caps don't matter in almost anywhere regular users are concerned and it's stupid to think Wikipedia should be otherwise. Just because you don't like the central consensus doesn't mean we can disregard it. If this is per WP:IAR, on what basis are you arguing this circumstance to be exceptional, such that it wouldn't have been specifically taken into account in the drafting of WP:SMALLDETAILS? Because if it is not exceptional in any way, to merely disregard a central consensus because we disagree with it would be in violation of WP:CONLEVEL. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 20:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose per Gonnym and WP:ASTONISH, except for calling the good faith nominator's thinking 'stupid' (learning curves take time, and failed RM's are part of a learning curve. 142.160.89.97, please continue with your good work on Wikipedia, and although it's not required maybe consider selecting a user name so I could send thanks for your good edits on suffragette topics). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose Seems a common name. Better is a discussion (see also: Talk:The Purple Revolution: The Year That Changed Everything and Talk:Gods and Kings: The Rise and Fall of Alexander McQueen and John Galliano Hhkohh (talk) 11:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

How do you reconcile your position with our book-specific guideline, WP:SUBTITLE, which states:

Usually, a Wikipedia article on a book (or other medium, such as a movie, TV special or video game) does not include its subtitle in the Wikipedia page name, per WP:CONCISE. The only exception to that is short article titles, for disambiguation purposes.

Seems a common name. Of what relevance is the fact that it is a common name?

Better is a discussion I have no idea what that means. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 20:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

This RM was over when you chose not to add (book) as a descriptor. The article Nuclear terrorism is the only logical and possible redirect of the upper-case Nuclear Terrorism and always will be. Would (book) make a difference? I don't know, haven't checked it out. But please assume good faith, and maybe ask what somebody means instead of telling us that you have no idea what they mean. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:16, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Because this is a bold move. Also, WP:SUBTITLE is not a policy, just a guideline, see also WP:COMMONNAME and other related policy Hhkohh (talk) 10:03, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose per all the above. This book is not the primary topic for "Nuclear Terrorism" in any way you choose to capitalise it.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose and snow close - and IP please register for an account. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:34, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose This book is not the primary topic for "nuclear terrorism", and using the subtitle is a form of natural disambiguation. AusLondonder (talk) 01:52, 11 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.