Talk:Religious right in the United States

Merge Discussion

They are the same concept; I say Merge 'em. Also, I'm not sure that "theocon(servative)" can reasonably be described as an epithet (although it certainly is often used as such). Only a communist would say a thing like that! --Cjs56 18:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment I think the merged article should go under the title "Theocon" as that was the title used in the article coining the neologism. --Cjs56 18:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Support the merge. --Checco 09:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 5 September 2022

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 17:39, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

---

Theoconservatism → Religious right in the United States – Procedural nomination. In June another user tried to nominate this for merging into the proposed title, but the proposed title is currently a redirect (to Christian right) rather than an article — so what they were really trying to propose was that this page be moved to the proposed title rather than "merged" into it. Accordingly, I've removed the merger templates from the affected pages and am submitting this through the RM process where it's supposed to be. Their original "merger" rationale at Talk:Religious right in the United States was "It seems like these are two words for the same thing. Since Wikipedia is based on topics not terms it is correct to treat them in the same article."; there was one oppose on the grounds that "theoconservatism is a term for a much more specific viewpoint than the more general term 'religious right'", but no other participation at all until I caught the problem just now. I have no opinion of my own on the merits or demerits of the proposed move; this is strictly a procedural nomination because I had to close down an unresolved discussion that was taking place in the wrong venue for what was being requested. Bearcat (talk) 23:23, 5 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 06:33, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose move. There are two issues: Should we have a separate article on this subset of the Christian right, and, if so, what should the title of that article be? The correct venue to decide the first, and most important, question is Talk:Christian right, as part of a new merge proposal. If the merge is declined, then "Theoconservative" is attested as a name for the movement, so the article can remain at its current location. Tevildo (talk) 06:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support. "Theoconservatism" is not a common name, so a descriptive title is better. Srnec (talk) 20:19, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support per Srnec. SnowFire (talk) 09:55, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Srnec is obviously correct. "Religious right in the United States" is clearly the commonly used way of referring to this. Doug Weller talk 09:35, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.