Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rocketry/Titles/Poll

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This poll is now closed. Discussion is ongoing on a second round of page moves.

This is a poll on if and how to implement the proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rocketry/Titles. Registered users may vote once in this poll, and do not necessarily need to be a member of the Rocketry WikiProject. Please provide rationale for your vote, unless you have already stated it on the proposal discussion page. If you wish for alterations to be made to a proposal that you broadly support, please place a vote of "support" or "conditional support", and state those alterations in your vote. If you support both proposals, but prefer one over the other, please vote to support either proposal, but state your preference in your vote.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was implement proposal 2. Some admin assistance is required, please see below. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 09:42, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Support either proposal 1 or 2

  1. Something needs to be done to sort out this mess. Support as proposer, per comments on main discussion page. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 07:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Just to clarify, this includes my preference for #2, as stated on that page. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 09:42, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
  1. Conditional support, as long as likely alternatives entered by a naive searcher have redirects to the standard form (or to a disambiguation page where other likely targets exist). Eg, "V-2" should not need "rocket" or "(rocket)" to find the target. Also, some of the proposed moves listed confuse the "rocket"/"(rocket)" alternatives with other issues: eg, "Saturn rocket family" is not logically the same as "Saturn rocket", being a set of different vehicles, which probably deserve separate articles. Such distinctions should not be obliterated to paper over the "mess", I think. Wwheaton (talk) 03:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
  2. Support - Either proposal is an improvement, proposal 2 (with disambig phrases in parenthesis) is better, because disambigs work so well. (sdsds - talk) 03:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Next vote here

Support proposal 1 only

  1. First vote here

Support proposal 2 only

  1. First vote here

Oppose both proposals

  1. Oppose The proposals were *not* modified to take into account the discussion that took place. Project Nike is not a rocket, it's a project that developed several series of rockets. Long March 1 is a rocket in its own right, and should not be merged into its family article. Long March 2 is a rocket in its own right, the family article should be elsewhere. "M-100" is most commonly known as Messier 100 and not the rocket. Soyuz 2 is a space mission. 70.55.203.112 (talk) 12:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
    If my concerns can be addressed, I prefer option 1. As it is, I oppose it, because no consideration was given to the discussion that took place. 70.55.203.112 (talk) 12:36, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
There was no consensus to apply any of those changes to the proposal (in most cases, there was only one proponent), with the sole exception of M-100, which I accidentally overlooked, and would be happy to reach a compromise on by moving it in line with whichever of the above proposals is passed. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 12:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
  1. Next vote here

Comments

Shouldn't an RFC be filed for this? 70.55.203.112 (talk) 12:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

This is only a move proposal. It could result in a de facto naming convention, which could be used as the basis for a later de jure proposal, which would require RFC, but this should be fine as long as it is listed at RM at the end of its run, which I am about to do. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 08:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Note on closure

Three votes in favour, one against, gives consensus to implement. Two votes to one in favour of proposal two over proposal one. Several changes to the proposal were accepted, and a second round of moves will be required to ensure that these are standardised with regard to articles that were not part of this proposal. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 09:42, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Implementation

Items in italics have been dealt with. Items in bold require the assistance of an administrator.

Implementation was completed on 3 November. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 09:55, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Changes

  1. ^ a b c d e Per discussion, "(rocket family)" not "(rocket)" will be used to disambiguate families.
  2. ^ Missile content will still be split out
  3. ^ a b c d Modified due to objections
  4. ^ Removed due to objections
  5. ^ a b c Removed due to changed circumstances since original proposal
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rocketry/Titles/Poll&oldid=1144299664"