Talk:Tiergarten

Requested move

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston (talk) 19:40, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tiergarten (disambiguation) → Tiergarten – To return to the article to its original title before this undiscussed move. This subsequent move discussion confirmed that there is no primary topic for "Tiergarten", so this disambiguation page should be at that name. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 02:42, 3 May 2015 (UTC) — AjaxSmack 05:11, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:42, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The move was correct. The park is the clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- That was shown not to be the case at this failed move attempt. Otherwise, the title of the park article would now be simply "Tiergarten". — AjaxSmack 00:20, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - I see "no consensus". What do you see? -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:48, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - Exactly. There was no consensus to move the park article to "Tiergarten" because the park is not the primary meaning (refer to that discussion for evidence). Until this undiscussed move in December 2014, the neighborhood, not the dab page or the park was the article titled "Tiergarten". I'm not sure what events occurred in the past five months that would cause the park to suddenly be so much more important that the primary topic would flip. I'm not arguing that the neighborhood is still the primary topic, just that the park isn't either. Therefore, the dab page should occupy the title. — AjaxSmack 20:54, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why this was relisted, a controversial move counter a previous no consensus discussion should simply be reverted. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:57, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I put a request in at the technical requests section per WP:RMUM but that admin's move was reverted so I initiated a full RM discussion to try and end the back and forth. — AjaxSmack 02:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Take a look at the comments about the Tiergarten at TripAdvisor.[1] Every single one is about the park: "Wonderful outdoor space in centre of city." "we rented bikes and pedaled through the trails" "The paths/trails seemed to be very well maintained." Not one of these commenters felt the need to clarify that they did not bike through the Bundestag, Reichstag, or one of the other federal buildings. Too hip to be cool (talk) 05:33, 3 May 2015 (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.