Talk:Davie Village
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is part of WikiProject Vancouver, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and the surrounding metropolitan area. To participate, edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |  |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | |
| If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments. |
.svg/32px-Flag_of_Vancouver_(Canada).svg.png){kind=small}
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. |
[edit] Requested move
- Davie Village, Vancouver, Canada → Davie Village … Rationale: Davie Village already redirects to the article. Why do we need such a long name? … Please share your opinion at Talk:Davie Village, Vancouver, Canada. — Usgnus 02:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- The following discussion is an archived debate 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 debate was move. Andrewa 02:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Obvious support. Why lengthen the name when there's no other Davie Village article? -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 04:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose, with support for a modified proposal to move to Davie Village (Vancouver). Ckatzchatspy 06:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Support Simple names are best if there is no chance for confusion with another similarly named thing. --Polaron | Talk 06:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Strong Support per nom. -- Selmo (talk) 18:27, 28 August 2006 (UTC) ---- Selmo (talk) 18:27, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Support per nom. --Serge 21:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.
[edit] Discussion
Add any additional comments ʑ
- Counter-proposal to move to Davie Village (Vancouver). I think including the city name really helps with clarity, it would be consistent with the other city neighbourhoods, and the parentheses are easily removed with a pipe: Davie Village (You don't even have to retype the short form - just include the pipe symbol "|" like so: [[Davie Village (Vancouver)|]]). Perhaps more importantly, even if there is no other "Davie Village" article, naming it as such gives too much presence to a neighbourhood. Just as many cities are tagged with their province/state, neighbourhoods should be tagged with their city, unless it's something really, really well known. Ckatzchatspy 06:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- The only articles (with one exception) in Category:Vancouver neighbourhoods that are disambiguated with (Vancouver) are those that are ambiguous names. --Usgnus 06:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
