Talk:Highland Council

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 4 June 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from The Highland Council to Highland Council. The result of the discussion was moved.

Requested move 4 June 2024

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) Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Highland Council → Highland Council – Per WP:THE, and to be WP:CONSISTENT with the articles on other Scottish council areas, and other jurisdictions of all sorts generally. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 15:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose the council's logo uses "The" though Mapit doesn't. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant. At least tens of thousands of entities (from government bodies to corporations to educational institutions to churches to nonprofits/NGOs) prefer to prefix their names with "The" and do it in logos and letterheads, and this has no effect whatsoever on whether WP will do it (which is almost never – we only do it when independent source usage nearly always includes "The"). We've had the same RM discussion many, many times before, and the outcome is always the same, the removal of the unnecessary "The". In point of fact, the very reason that WP:THE exists is to counteract the tendency of various editors to stick a leading "The" in front of things, either to make something sound more important than something else (a WP:NPOV problem) or to mimic a trademark (against MOS:TM). See also WP:OFFICIALNAME. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 12:25, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Things like unusual capitalization of symbols etc are normally removed like the Wikipedia logo being in all caps but with definite articles the use of it in the logo is probably a good indivation its part of the name rather than a modifier otherwise it would just have "Highland Council" in the logo image. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:23, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per above.---Ehrenkater (talk) 17:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Argument against the Council are quite particular about using "The". They actually reject nomination papers that don't include it. spirit of the squirrel (talk) 20:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See above; I don't want to repeat all of that. How the subject may prefer to write its own materials never determines the answer to this question. WP permits a leading "The" only in the rarest cases (outside of titles of published works), such as The Hershey Company and The Walt Disney Company specifically because independent source usage overwhelmingly does likewise. That is demonstrably not the case here [1]. Also, various courts have extremely specific document formatting requirements that vary by jurisdiction, covered in lengthy legal style manuals. This has no effect of any kind on how WP writes about laws, courts, and legal cases. "X is written as Y in external context Z" does not magically transform into "X must be written as Y on Wikipedia". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 12:25, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Definite article not usually capitslised in running text, whatever the council may prefer. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.