Talk:Science, Money, and Politics

Untitled

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move unsupported and does not appear to be well founded in guideline or policy.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

Science, Money, and Politics → Science, Money, and Politics (book) — Although there is no other page with original title in wikipedia, but this title is really confusing, as Science, Money, Politics are too general terms. Or creator should use full name of book for clarification. — Quality check 10:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

...While searching in wikipedia for Money and Politics or for Science and Politics any user will see this page in search result and if (book) is not attached to this page, user may unnecessary go to page. Try[[1]] and [[2]]. Adding (book) to this page name will def. improve wikipedia. Quality check 17:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quality check (talk • contribs)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Oppose. See WP:NC-BK#Precision: "(book)" or a similar qualifier is not used in article names, unless where needed for disambiguation from *existing* Wikipedia pages. Sam⁵ (talk) 18:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose while the terms are general in themselves I can't see what else someone whould be looking for typing all these terms together. For example someone looking for info on either Science, money, or politics would type the terms indvidually and not in a group. in short, I don't see the confusion. --76.66.191.235 (talk) 21:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Notability

Can someone explain why/how this book is notable? See WP:NB#Academic books; is it used in a college course, or highly influential? Sam⁵ (talk) 18:08, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The book is notable per WP:Notability (books): It has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself. Johnfos (talk) 19:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've made this a bit clearer in the references. I'm not proposing to delete the article; I just wondered whether the book is more notable than this article suggests. Sam⁵ (talk) 19:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Science, Money, and Politics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080409224222/http://www.nybooks.com:80/articles/article-preview?article_id=15366 to http://www.nybooks.com/articles/article-preview?article_id=15366

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:17, 26 January 2016 (UTC)