Talk:Pennsylvania courts of common pleas

Requested move 27 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: No consensus to move either one. There's some support for the Ohio one, but not consensus even for that (non-admin closure) В²C ☎ 05:47, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

---

• Pennsylvania courts of common pleas → Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas
• Ohio Courts of Common Pleas → Ohio Court of Common Pleas

– To move to the singular form (MOS:SINGULAR) and, in the case of the Pennsylvania article, to capitalize the name of the court, which appears to be the convention used for most other court names. See, e.g., the articles listed at Court of Common Pleas, which are all shown there with uppercase. The change to uppercase for the Pennsylvania article would revert an undiscussed move in 2010. Another possibility would be to move them to Court of Common Pleas (Pennsylvania) and Court of Common Pleas (Ohio) —BarrelProof (talk) 00:46, 27 September 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:11, 4 October 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Iffy★Chat -- 13:55, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

• Comment - I'm not sure here. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals)#Exceptions: Articles on groups of distinct entities that are nevertheless often considered together seems to fit this scenario. Regarding the capitalization of the name, per the official site it is "Pennsylvania Courts of Common Pleas". --Gonnym (talk) 15:41, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

  If we focus on the concept of a group of courts rather than such a court in the WP:SINGULAR, then I believe Wikipedia guidelines would favor lowercase, because this would not then be a proper noun, regardless of whether an official website uses capital letters. If we go in that direction, that would suggest moving the Ohio article but not the Pennsylvania one. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

  Florida Keys (and not Florida keys) is an example of from that exception bullet that uses both plural and capital letters. --Gonnym (talk) 07:50, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

  Florida Keys seems a bit different. That's the proper name of a place – an archipelago – not a collection of institutions. In some sense, I think Florida Keys is somewhat similar to Miami Marlins. It looks plural, but it's functionally singular – it's one specific thing in some sense. And geographical locations seem to have a strong tendency for capitalization and distinct guidelines (WP:PLACE). Even things that have names derived from places inherit the capitalization to indicate that – e.g., Key lime and West Indian manatee. —BarrelProof (talk) 13:49, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

• Weak oppose The article is about all of the courts of common pleas, not any one particular one. While it may be appropriate to move this article to "Pennsylvania Courts of Common Pleas", that is not the current request. Because the subject of the article are the courts collectively, it only seems appropriate that the title of plural. For a parallel, see United States courts of appeals. Ergo Sum 06:10, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • @Ergo Sum: There are two moves proposed here. Do you have an opinion on the Ohio title? bd2412 T 22:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
    • The rationale that I give is the same for both. So, yes, I would oppose the Ohio move as well for the same reasons. Ergo Sum 23:56, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose proposed, but move Ohio Courts of Common Pleas to Ohio courts of common pleas. This is not a single court but a number of them, and once pluralized, this is not a proper noun anymore. No such user (talk) 15:37, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals). And also per No such user. —usernamekiran(talk) 18:04, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • If we don't move them to singular, we ought to move the Ohio one to lowercase, also per No such user, since it is not a proper noun in the plural. —BarrelProof (talk) 15:02, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose. This appears to be a stretch of guidelines, and it is not clear that the proposals are based on quality source usage. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:46, 1 November 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.