Talk:Air Safaris

Move?

 * 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: bold move reverted. Opinions here are 2-2, no consensus for CHCBOY's bold move to accommodate their new article on the NZ airline, and the new qualifier (Defunct) is incorrect in any event. Hatnotes are the usual way to handle navigation to new articles unless/until they're determined to be the new primary topic (or to have ushered in no primary topic). If new consensus is formed that there is no longer a primary topic, the disambiguation page can be moved here once this is moved to Air Safaris (UK airline). -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:48, 4 July 2012 (UTC) JHunterJ (talk) 17:48, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Air Safaris (Defunct) → Air Safaris –
 * New name is not normal or standard. A hatnote on the article (I've already added one) is more appropriate. Sionk (talk) 11:26, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Is this the primary topic?  Air Safaris (NZ airline) may have a better claim.  Vegaswikian (talk) 18:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * A better claim in what sense? This airline was formed in 1959 and seems to have substantially better sources than the Air Safaris (NZ airline). The notability of Air Safaris New Zealand is questionable and probably doesn't meet WP:NCORP. Sionk (talk) 23:18, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Operating for 40+ years and still in business? Vegaswikian (talk) 05:11, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose, a move to Air Safaris (UK airline) would be better. 1959 to 1962 doesn't make it main subject. I would say however that Air Safaris should probably be a disamb page - Google Books shows about a dozen companies with this name, even if they don't have articles the name is so generic a listing might be worth doing. In fact I'll do one at Air Safaris (disambiguation) to demonstrate. It'd be worth doing whatever the primary is/isn't. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:04, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Dont think this discussion is needed to restore an article back to the original name jusst after it was moved without discussion, which is why I moved it back. Suggest we put it back again where it has sat without an issue, we dont dab pages and leave a redirect page behind on the original name. So move it back and then if needed start a discussion on a move from Air Safaris to something else. MilborneOne (talk) 11:43, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Completely agree! And a disambiguation page is completely unneccessary for only two articles. A hatnote is appropriate in this case (I've already added one). Disambiguation pages are not list articles. Sionk (talk) 14:42, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * When I see an exclamation mark in a debate I think overstatement. But whatever, Sionk, you have deleted the other No.3 No.4 less notable Air Safaris. I'd still oppose the return as the name is somewhat generic, plus Vegaswikian's oppose, but not really bothered. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:04, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Articles were deleted? I did not see any.  Vegaswikian (talk) 05:25, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know how In ictu oculi can second-guess how much (or how little) I agree with someone either ;) Sionk (talk) 11:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I clearly support the original name, and as it is normal practice to revert undiscussed page moves but for some reason this was also reverted so I propose that this discussion is closed the article moved back to its original name (per normal practice) and any move request from Air Safaris made after the move back. MilborneOne (talk) 16:21, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Or to Air Safaris (defunct) with lowercase 'd'? Or Air Safaris (UK airline) like User:In ictu oculi says? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No other defunct airline is called "Airline (defunct)". It's rather like calling a biographical article of a deceased person "Jo Bloggs (dead)". CHCBOY moved this page to an innapropriate name without any discussion and I still don't see why the page can't be moved back until some consensus has been reached. The Air Safaris (NZ airline) needs at least one non-specialist news source before it meets Wikipedia's notability requirements, so I don't see how it can become the main subject yet. Sionk (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * This RM is clearly a mistake and against normal process, as we dont request move back to the original name for a non-consensus move that was challenged. It would help as well if Sionk withdraws the move request, we can put the article back where it should be and we can then discuss the move from Air Safaris properly. MilborneOne (talk) 18:58, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I requested it be moved back to Air Safaris. We're both requesting the same thing, aren't we? Sionk (talk) 21:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * We are but my point is it should be just moved back without discussion, which is what I did before being reverted. The discussion was not needed as the original move had no consensus. So I dont oppose it being at Air Safaris what I object to is the travesty of a move request that is not really needed. So we have got into a backwater of an out of process request. I was reluctant to revert the revert as that could be seen as a WP:WHEEL so to break the impass if nobody else comments I will put it back to Air Safaris after twenty-four hours and anybody wanting to rename it can start a new move request. MilborneOne (talk) 18:16, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I assumed the request would be non-controversial. I'm not an admin so couldn't move it back myself. I'm not sure Vegaswikian realised the series of events when they opposed the move back to its original name. Sionk (talk) 19:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Understood Sionk you raised it in good faith, I reverted it as an Admin but even I got reverted! MilborneOne (talk) 20:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.