Jump to content

Talk:Octagonal (horse)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

There are other useful uses of the word 'octagonal'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ProfDEH (talkcontribs) 19:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move 05 February 2014

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move. Xoloz (talk) 17:40, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



OctagonalOctagonal (horse) – this should redirect to octagon as the primary usage of "octagonal" is as an adjective for the polygon, and this WP:ASTONISHes as the landing point. Also will prevent linkage failures for people expecting wikilinks of adjectives to link to the primary topic noun. -- 70.50.148.248 (talk) 07:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
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 policy on article titles.

Discussion

[edit]
Comment: Personally, I think it is pretty strange and unlikely to enter adjectives like "triangular" into wikipedia expecting material about the adjective. I expect that the number of people ASTONISHed by the current setup will be exceedingly small. Speaking as a mathematician, the status quo seems fine to me. I guess there is precedent like for the search result for "dry," but even that seems weird, and "octagonal" seems much more obscure. Rschwieb (talk) 14:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the number of people searching for "octagonal" would be small, but I still expect that not many of them would have in mind the horse. But the greater concern is that people often link to adjectives. I'd probably format the link as [[octagon]]al but I've observed that others don't always do that. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:10, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't we just replace any links like that with appropriate links to wiktionary? Normal encyclopedias aren't dictionaries, and while wikipedia isn't a normal encyclopedia, it doesn't seem sensible to needlessly step on wiktionary's toes. Rschwieb (talk) 14:03, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why point them to Wiktionary when our article, Octagon, covers the topic that someone clicking the link would be searching for? bd2412 T 03:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I've updated the hatnote to a more "standardized" template, Template:About, to reflect the newly created Octagonal (disambiguation). I personally support moving the article about the horse to a different name. Octagon should have Template:Redirect from "Octagonal". --Anon126 (talk - contribs) 03:01, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: FWIW, if the move motion succeeds, Octagonal (horse) is the appropriate form of rename, consistent with other named race horse articles, so that's not a problem. I still oppose the move, but I'm not going to make a federal case about it,I withdraw my opposition to this move the supporters have legitimate arguments. Montanabw(talk) 19:54, 6 February 2014 (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.