Talk:MEDIA sub-programme of Creative Europe

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 26 February 2019

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 section.

The result of the move request was: moved (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 21:25, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MEDIA Programme → Media Programme of the European Union – Per MOS:TM, MOS:CAPS, MOS:ABBR. This is not an acronym, it's "logo capitals", just like "SONY" for Sony. The phase "Media Programme" is too ambiguous (should redirect to Program#Arts and entertainment disambiguation section). We should use full names as natural disambigation when possible, not resort to parenthetical constructions like "Media Programme (European Union)", though that should exist as a redirect. It would be much more WP:CONSISTENT use the full name of the organization, to agree with our treatment of other such entities (see Category:Agencies of the European Union, Category:Institutions of the European Union, Category:United Nations Development Group, Category:United Nations specialized agencies etc.; there are a handful of exceptions, but all of them have word-acronym names that have become their WP:COMMONNAMEs by a very wide margin, as in the case of UNICEF and UNESCO (most people have heard of them but not of their full names, presenting a WP:RECOGNIZABILITY issue that does not exist in this case). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:50, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PS: If anyone wants to say "Well, the EU spells it MEDIA, so it's official", see WP:OFFICIALNAMES: WP simply doesn't care whether something's official. Reliable sources would have to consistently refer to this as, and only as, "MEDIA Programme", not "Media Programme of the European Union", and that clearly isn't the case [1].
PPS: The article text reads as if mostly plagiarized directly from a brochure or webpage, though this may not be a copyright problem (I'm not sure what copyright might or might not apply to EU work).
PPPS: If this move proceeds, the resulting MEDIA Programme redirect should have {{R from trademark}} and {{R from alternative capitalisation|of=Media Programme}} added.
— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:50, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SMcCandlish: so it should be CAPS? Sounds like Media Programme of the European Union In ictu oculi (talk) 15:58, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Ditto, I'm assuming that's what you actually meant? Also, should "Programme" be capitalised? Or should it be "sub-programme"? The EU website doesn't seem to be very clear on either point. If the latter, does it really warrant a separate article or should it be merged into Creative Europe? PC78 (talk) 16:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  I have no objection to an alternative name or a merger; I was just going on the assumption that the exact phrase "Media Programme" is a proper name attested somewhere. Sourcing for this entire thing is actually thin and hard to find. I don't know the exact bureaucratic terminology of the EU, nor whether this is classified as a sub-programme, or what. I.e., I'm just trying to fix the over-capitalization and logo-mimicry problem, and A'ing GF about the name otherwise. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 04:41, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Doh! That was a silly copy-paste error on my part. I've fixed the nomination; yes, it should be "Media". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 04:19, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
then Support In ictu oculi (talk) 07:53, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'm not convinced that there isn't a better or more appropriate alternative, but the proposed move will be a necessary improvement on the current title. PC78 (talk) 16:36, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Lazz _R 21:22, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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