Talk:Wool town
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Synoman Barris in topic Requested move 1 October 2020
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Requested move 1 October 2020
edit- 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(non-admin closure) Megan☺️ Talk to the monster 18:27, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Wool towns → Wool town – Shouldn't this be singular per WP:PLURAL noting at Boxford, Suffolk it is linked as such. However the Suffolk Wool Towns website and Visit Suffolk use the plural. However as can be seen in the article it deals with places outside Suffolk. If it is a proper noun referring specifically to the ones in Suffolk then surely it would be Wool Towns (capital "T") but if its generic then it should be singular as noted per PLURAL similar to the fact that the article about the animal is at Dog not Dogs though the latter is a primary redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:41, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
- Move to Wool town: As nom said, per WP:PLURAL article names should be in their singular form. In the case of the websites, they make it grammatically correct by adding an article "the" before Wool Towns, though articles are generally not used at the start of article titles. — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 18:47, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:40, 7 October 2020 (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.