Jump to content

Talk:1925 Charlevoix–Kamouraska earthquake

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move

[edit]
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, considerable consensus opposing move. —James (TalkContribs)8:26pm 10:26, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


1925 Charlevoix–Kamouraska earthquake1925 Charlevoix-Kamouraska earthquake — The title of this earthquake should be hyphenated, not en dashed. All reliable sources I have seen hyphen the name, such as at the Natural Resources Canada website here, here and here. Volcanoguy 09:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose—First page of my google search, and look what came up: 1925 Charlevoix–kamouraska Earthquake: 1925 Charlevoix–kamouraska Earthquake on WN Network delivers the latest Videos and Editable pages for News & Events, including Entertainment, Music, Sports, ...
wn.com/1925_Charlevoix–Kamouraska_earthquake.

It is disruptive to move pages so they breach the MoS guidelines when there are sources out there that it reflects. Tony (talk) 12:31, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where is your proof? A search of Charlevoix–Kamouraska earthquake shows like none except for pages related to Wikipedia.[1] You may think it's disruptive, but the current title disrupts me since it is not used in geological sense. And this is not even a reliable source. It looks like they took that title from this article because if you look at the top of that page there is a link about Wikipedia. Volcanoguy 13:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Charlevoix and Kamouraska appear to be two separate regions, and therefore should be en dashed. –CWenger (talk) 03:04, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I actually found quite a few references to the "Charlevoix–Kamouraska region" or the "Charlevoix–Kamouraska seismic zone", which leads me to think that it is a single region, at least in some contexts, including geology. Dohn joe (talk) 21:20, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Sources have both dashes and hyphens, demonstrating that dashes are correct. No reason to move away from the MOS. — kwami (talk) 09:57, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This matter needs to be handled centrally, at WT:MOS. WP:MOS most clearly supports the en dash. But there is current discussion at WT:MOS that affects thousands of articles with hyphens or dashes. To grind through all this article by far-flung article is ridiculously inefficient.–¡ɐɔıʇǝoNoetica!T12:53, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:COMMONNAME. (It seems to be the name of a seismic region). All RS use a hyphen: Encyclopedia of disasters "Charlevoix-Kamouraska area" [2], Proceedings of the ninth Thematic Conference on Geologic Remote Sensing [3]. Atlantic geology, Volume 27 [4], Current research: Recherches en cours, partie E.Geological Survey of Canada [5], Cambridge University Press[6]. Opposers have not shown any RS that uses a dash. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:45, 26 March 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.