Talk:2013 Yorkshire Bank 40

Move Article

I think this article should be moved to 2013 Yorkshire Bank 40. I'm not exactly sure how that process would work. Can someone do that? Rougue1987 (talk) 00:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 27 March 2023

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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) {{ping|ClydeFranklin}} (t/c) 00:32, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

---

• 2013 Yorkshire Bank 40 → 2013 ECB 40
• 2012 Clydesdale Bank 40 → 2012 ECB 40
• 2011 Clydesdale Bank 40 → 2011 ECB 40
• 2010 Clydesdale Bank 40 → 2010 ECB 40

– The tournament name was ECB 40, as per the article being listed there. Clydesdale and Yorkshire Bank were just sponsor names, which don't need to be used, as per WP:NOTADVERTISING. This is the same as how all t20 Blast (formerly Twenty20 Cup) season articles use the non sponsored name, and is also what we do for most other cricket season articles when a common, non-sponsored name exists. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:04, 27 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. {{ping|ClydeFranklin}} (t/c) 17:25, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose WP:NOTADVERTISING doesn't actually cover this in the slightest, and "ECB 40" was never used other than a few articles during its formation, and so is not at all a WP:COMMONNAME. WP:CRITERIA tells us to aim for:
  1. Recognizability – Nope.
  2. Naturalness – Nope.
  3. Precision – Sure.
  4. Concision – Yes.
  5. Consistency – Sort of, although Benson & Hedges Cup retains its sponsor name, and the Friends Provident Trophy and its relevant seasons all maintain theirs too.

How many sources use ECB 40 after 2009 articles about its creation, and a handful in 2010? I can't find any? Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 12:31, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

— Relisting.  – CityUrbanism 🗩 🖉 18:44, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

• Comment WikiProjects WP:CRICKET and WP:UK have been notified of this discussion. – CityUrbanism 🗩 🖉 18:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
• I tend to think we're better off sticking with what we have unless we can show a widespread use of the name. Each of those could be, however, helpful redirects. The naming of one-day tournaments has been linked with sponsors since they started pretty much. It'd difficult to get around these. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:49, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per Harrias. Normally I am dead against sponsorship names, but mostly around grounds and tournaments like the County Championship. However, here an exception can be made per WP:COMMONNAME and it aligns with the other English one-day tournament from 1963 to present: Gillette Cup, NatWest Trophy, C&G Trophy etc. StickyWicket (talk) 18:55, 11 April 2023 (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.