Talk:Spui (river)

Rivers Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

Move? (1)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

As is recommended by River-project. It was suggested that this article should be renamed Spui River. The vote is shown below:

Support. We should follow naming conventions. -- Darwinek 10:07, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Follow naming conventions. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:08, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Same as above. – AxSkov (☏) 09:24, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been renamed after the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 08:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Move? (2)

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: no consensus to move. Favonian (talk) 17:18, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spui (river) → Spui River –

Talk page and WP policy both weigh in favor of a parenthesis-free title. Relisted and a note left at WT:RIVERS. Favonian (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2013 (UTC). Red Slash 00:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See old discussion above. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:11, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support; more natural title, although I'd prefer "river" to have a lowercase R. Sources don't call it "Spui (river)" and nobody's going to search for that. bobrayner (talk) 03:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Note that in Europe the word "River" usually comes before the name, thus River Spui would be more likely. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- My understanding of the suggested guideline for naming at WP:RIVER was that "River X" only goes for UK/Irish rivers, and that we go with "X" or "X River" for all countries without a common local English-language name for the river. Spui apparently isn't a good home for primary topic reasons, but "X (river)" is a terrible title for reasons I think everyone can agree on. Red Slash 00:37, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not my understanding. I think you should probably reread WP:NCRIVER. Does anybody say "Danube River", "Rhine River", "Nile River", "Po River", "Volga River" etc etc etc? As far as I know, it's only North America where "River" usually comes after the name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:NCRIVER. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The proposed title is not natural. There is no basis for the proposed title. The current title properly conveys the most commonly used name of this topic, "Spui", and is properly disambiguated in a manner that informatively distinguishes this use from others. --B2C 19:54, 12 April 2013 (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.