Talk:Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (India)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (India) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Requested move 14 June 2016[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved per WP:SMALLDETAILS. (closed by a page mover) (non-admin closure). Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (India) → Ministry of Information and Broadcasting – no other ministry with exact same name -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 07:01, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:PRECISION. Yeah, the Indian one might be the only one with the exact same name, but it is so generic-sounding that it might be anywhere in the world, anytime. The "disambiguator" provides a more than necessary hint to the reader whose ministry is that. No such user (talk) 07:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~, but I can see the nom's point. We probably need a new section of WP:AT to cover cases such as this, where a title is seriously ambiguous even if there are no other instances of it. But Wikipedia is better for not removing this particular disambiguator. Andrewa (talk) 10:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Support (change of vote), see discussion below. Andrewa (talk) 02:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support since this is the only ministry with this exact name. Remember that WP:SMALLDETAILS are enough to distinguish between separate topics. Hatnote to the Pakistan ministry if one feels it necessary. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

@Andrewa: @Tavix: I think this is one of eternal "no consensus" WP:AT issues, and I believe that digging through WT:TITLE and WP:RM archives we would find a number of similar debates and even RfCs. I think that some "preemptive disambiguation" (and IAR) is beneficial, but I understand the opposing positions. This is a borderline religious issue, because the articles about an Institute of Advanced Technology or People's Progressive Party (examples pulled off the top of my head) don't tend to attract much of searches and pageviews, i.e readers generally tend to not give a fuck. So maybe we should go along. No such user (talk) 21:44, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rather, we should disambiguate only when two or more articles have the same title. There's only one article with the title "Ministry of Information and Broadcasting" so there's no need to disambiguate. For those looking for something else with a different title, that's where hatnotes are useful. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmmm, you're quite right, the guidelines say Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead. [1] (My emphasis.) That's been clarified since I last had reason to check it... I have learned something. Andrewa (talk) 02:08, 22 June 2016 (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.

(edit conflict)with closer I think that we should append "(India)" in order to provide necessary context for the reader rather than to "disambiguate" in the Wikipedia sense. Let me provide a random list of similar Ministries across the world:

Ministry of Administration and Digitization (Poland) - unique, no other Ministry of Administration and Digitization
Ministry for Information Society and Telecommunications, Montenegro (redlink). [2]
Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Networks redirects to Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Networks (Greece)
Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure redirects to Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure of Georgia

For example, Category:Transport ministries shows that most ministries are ~~disambiguated~~ named with the country name indeed (some aren't, like Ministry of Transport and Roads Infrastructure), but it's not easy to say which of them require disambiguation per WP:D. I argue that readers (and editors) are better served with country name in such "inherently ambiguous" names, per principle of least astonishment. Bonus question for extra points: in which country is Transport Department located? Don't cheat and peek into the article. No such user (talk) 07:34, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The necessary context is the article itself. Disambiguation should be avoided if possible, as disambiguated titles aren't search terms, have to be piped when linking to them in articles, etc. -- Tavix ^(talk) 08:04, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not moved. I can't move this page in accordance with this consensus because there is an article titled Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (South Sudan), and thus the original statement that there is "no other ministry with exact same name" is false. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:44, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]