Talk:2020 Barda missile attacks

Requested move 29 October 2020

 * 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The result of the move request was: Withdrawn by nominator. Brandmeistertalk   15:30, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Barda ballistic missile attacks → Bombardment of Barda – The city was hit by not only ballistic missiles, but also cluster bombs — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib)  18:32, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment My understanding, based on BM-30_Smerch, is that this cluster munition was inside the ballistic missiles. If so, then bombardment is the same as the missile attack in that context. Brandmeistertalk  19:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment cluster warheads were inside the ballistic missiles, as I've seen here at least. So, ballistic missile it is. --► Sincerely:  Sola Virum  19:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, and consistent with Ganja ballistic missile attacks. Brandmeistertalk  12:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Missile attacks on Barda per per WP:CONCISE and MOS:PRECISION, and consistant with Missile attacks on Ganja.--ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 19:07, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose my own request. As other editors have pointed out, the cluster munitions I was talking about were inside the ballistic missiles, so "Barda ballistic missile attacks" is correct. — CuriousGolden (T·C)  19:41, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 14:59, 5 November 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.

Requested move 7 November 2020

 * 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 Gameshowandsportsfan2007 (talk) 16:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Barda ballistic missile attacks → 2020 Barda missile attacks – The use of ballistic missiles in Barda has not been confirmed by international media or reliable third party source. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 18:42, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. --ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 11:29, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Haven't checked if "ballistic" is used or not, but I know for sure use of cluster bombs was confirmed. So if it's not ballistic, it should be Barda cluster bomb attack. Also, not sure why you're adding the "2020", not like Barda was targeted before 2020. — Curious<b style="color:#c29d25">Golden</b> (T·C) </b> 11:37, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nom --E badalyan (talk) 17:43, 13 November 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 15 November 2020
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * 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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 19:57, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

2020 Barda missile attacks → Barda missile attacks – There haven't been any attacks on Barda before, so the "2020" specification is useless. — <b style="color:#c29d25">Curious</b><b style="color:#c29d25">Golden</b> (T·C) </b> 16:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:NCEVENTS. This event isn't historically identifiable enough to satisfy WP:NOYEAR.  Bait30   Talk 2 me pls? 20:21, 17 November 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 4 December 2020
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * 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: Not moved. Next move request will need to wait at least three months. (non-admin closure) Vpab15 (talk) 11:54, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

2020 Barda missile attacks → Barda missile attacks – There have been no attacks on this city before, therefore there's no need to specify the year by adding "2020". In addition, none of the WP:RS use "2020" in their titles to describe the event (BBC, Al Jazeera, France24) and this easily passes WP:NOYEAR. — <b style="color:#c29d25">Curious</b><b style="color:#c29d25">Golden</b> (T·C) </b> 10:37, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. 2020 is a useful identifier.  Sources not using the year is of no weight when it is a recent event.  The quest is whether years later, new sources specify the year.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:28, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * How is it useful? Does anything else other than this come up when someone searches the name without the year? This just seems like an extra detail in the title that helps no one. — <b style="color:#c29d25">Curious</b><b style="color:#c29d25">Golden</b> (T·C) </b> 06:33, 9 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose: the previous move request for the same title was closed less than two weeks before this was opened.  Bait30   Talk 2 me pls? 22:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Your argument for the previous one was that it isn't historically identifiable enough. How can you tell that event isn't historically identifiable enough? It's a widely recorded/sourced event with extensive number of reliable sources covering it. When does an event become historically identifiable? — <b style="color:#c29d25">Curious</b><b style="color:#c29d25">Golden</b> (T·C) </b> 06:33, 9 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose, I agree that this doesn't satisfy NOYEAR. BegbertBiggs (talk) 23:11, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.