Talk:Same-sex marriage in the Pitcairn Islands

RfC: Should this article be re-directed to the UK article??

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Should Same-sex marriage in the Pitcairn Islands be re-directed to Same-sex marriage in the United Kingdom? Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• No, it should be redirected to Same-sex marriage in the United Kingdom. Prcc27 (talk) 21:01, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
• The article should not be redirected. Jersey and Isle of Man have separate articles. I don't see why the Pitcairn can't. Ron 1987 (talk) 21:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • A) Neither of those jurisdictions have same-sex marriage and B) neither of those articles are stubs. Prcc27 (talk) 21:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Both of them were stubs at first and were expanded over time. Ron 1987 (talk) 21:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
• No, a redirect is not appropriate, as the Pitcairn Islands are not part of the UK, and (as Ron says), there are many more of these territories around... L.tak (talk) 21:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
• Clarificaton I had meant to say to the UK article. Sorry for the confusion; and I don't think it should be re-directed. Me-123567-Me (talk) 02:25, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
• What about an article "Same-sex marriage in the British Overseas Territories" with a section on each territory? Most have only a few thousand inhabitants and legalisation will likely be as "easy" as happened in the Pitcairn Islands. We could still have a separate article if there happens to be more content on a certain territory. SPQRobin (talk) 03:00, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Except same-sex marriage isn't legal in any of them except the Pitcairn Islands. The other articles are about recognition of same-sex unions. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:24, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
    • There currently isn't any other such article concerning a British overseas territory. The point is to combine information of similar, small jurisdictions, anticipating further legal developments in those territories, instead of creating for each territory a new article of stub length. We can also call it "Recognition of same-sex unions in the British Overseas Territories" if the title is the issue. Same-sex marriage is recognition of same-sex unions in any case. SPQRobin (talk) 11:51, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
      • My issue is that I don't want it called Recognition of same-sex unions in the British Overseas Territories. Me-123567-Me (talk) 21:10, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
      • But if the article was titled with same-sex marriage, then I suppose I could support one article. Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
• No, for purposes of consistency with pages for other territoriesMoonboy54 (talk) 05:40, 2 July 2015 (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.