Talk:Short-track speed skating at the 1986 Asian Winter Games

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

Requested move 23 February 2022[edit]

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. While numerically close, the arguments against the move are much weaker than the arguments for the move. Wikipedia intends to be consistent, especially regarding article titles. As HandsomeFella notes, these titles are not proper nouns, and therefore the form used should be the same as what we use elsewhere, which was recently decided in another RM. No meaningful refutation of this has been made, and this is not the proper venue to re-litigate that RM. (closed by non-admin page mover) Elli (talk | contribs) 20:28, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Compound modifier per discussion at Talk:Short-track speed skating#Requested move 15 February 2022. Cf. Cross-country skiing. First batch of several. If we can get this going WP:SNOWBALL without having to wait 7 days for each multi-move request, that would be appreciated. HandsomeFella (talk) 22:23, 23 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 06:27, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Why go through all this trouble when the existing titles match most English-language usage, including media reports and the governing bodies? It's not like there's any real confusion here. Dohn joe (talk) 02:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yea I aagree it's just a single hyphen,it would be still the same with or without the hyphens.Benzphan (talk) 05:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Let's just keep the errors, it's so tiresome to correct them", is that what you're saying? We've done big changes before, such as removing the comma from "Jr."/"Sr." suffixes (see WP:JR), and changing the naming convention for elections. You don't have to do the work, so relax. HandsomeFella (talk) 06:14, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm saying it's not an error. The phrase appears without the hyphen in most serious sources. It is grammatically correct. There are many actual grammatical errors floating around WP that could use our fixing, but this ain't one. Dohn joe (talk) 18:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course it's an error. The fact that readers understand it written without the hyphen does not make it correct.
    Did you read the "Examples" section in the link to "compound modifier"? You should.
    Do you think "zero-liability protection" is the same thing as "zero liability protection"? Do you think that a "man-eating shark" is the same thing as a "man eating shark"?
    The only reason you believe the lack of a hyphen here is correct is that there is no other meaning that makes sense (as there is in the examples mentioned).
    The absense of an alternative meaning that makes sense does of course not make it correct. You are wrong. HandsomeFella (talk) 12:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. While FIS writes cross-country with a hyphen. ISU are not and therefore in my opinion there is no need for this change. Nimrodbr (talk) 08:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support to coincide with the moves at Talk:Short-track speed skating#Requested move 15 February 2022  oncamera  (talk page) 17:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @admin: relist please. HandsomeFella (talk) 10:14, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Whichever approach is taken, it would be nice for these and Short(-)track speed skating and Long(-)track speed skating to be consistent. However, I don't think it is necessarily incorrect to omit the hyphen. There is such a thing as an open compound, and my personal impression is that de facto usage does not hyphenate as much as style guides might recommend (and we should remember that style guidance for Wikipedia and for English in general should try to tilt toward being descriptive rather than prescriptive). Hyphenating things that are not ordinarily hyphenated in reliable sources can be a bit disconcerting to the reader. One of the exceptions to the prescription for hyphenation is when the interpretation is sufficiently clear without it. See English compound, which says "The following compound modifiers are not normally hyphenated: // * Compound modifiers that are not hyphenated in the relevant dictionary or that are unambiguous without a hyphen. // ..." —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:34, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose. It seems that the sources are contradictory here so a lack of consistency between titles might actually reflect reality. The media does use the hyphen, so the RM for Short track speed skating to Short-track for the sport in general seems fine. The IOC website clearly does not use the hyphen, nor does other IOC media, so this means that events of Short-track speed skating at the Olympics are called "Short Track Speed Skating". SnowFire (talk) 05:08, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not about what sources say. These article names are not proper nouns. If they were, they would be capitalized similar to how it is on the IOC website, i.e. "Short Track Speed Skating [at the Winter Olympics]". 1999 World Short Track Speed Skating Championships, in contrast, is a tournament name. i.e. a proper noun. This RM is all about grammar. HandsomeFella (talk) 08:25, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, this is about punctuation, not grammar. The current titles are all proper English and make sense syntactically. The proposed titles are no better: "short-track speed skating" can mean either "speed skating on a short track" or "skating at short-track speed". How do we possibly know what it actually refers to? Context and normal English usage. Same as with the current titles. Dohn joe (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true. If it meant "skating at short-track speed" then it would be titled "short-track–speed skating". The hyphens and dashes remove any ambiguity from the title, which is why they exist. Also, Wikipedia's style in these matters follows our internal WP:MOS, we do not have to adhere to what outside bodies choose to do, so looking at the IOC website and Reuters etc. is irrelevant, unless the usage is so overwhelming as to constitute a deliberate style choice.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:05, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It does not remove every ambiguity, which is why the New York Times uses "short-track speedskating". Any ambiguity, however, is practically identical between the existing and proposed titles, which is why most reliable sources omit the hyphen - it's not necessary! Dohn joe (talk) 18:21, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - once the other RM had completed, this shouldn't have even have gone through a separate RM - there is zero reason why these articles should use a separate name from the name of the sport itself. It sounds like opposers above are opposed to the whole principle of having a hyphen, in which case they should speak to the closer at Talk:Short-track_speed_skating#Requested_move_15_February_2022 rather than re-litigating that result here.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:01, 11 March 2022 (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.