Talk:Crusade cycle

Requested move 30 August 2022

 * 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: page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:24, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Crusade Cycle → Crusade cycle – Per apparent consensus at Talk:Lorraine_cycle. QuietHere (talk) 20:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:22, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Support, but we don't need another discussion when the consensus has already been made clear. Dicklyon (talk) 03:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't wanna assume anything about consensus regarding this based on a few comments in a different page's discussion. And even so, crusade cycle already exists as a redirect so I couldn't complete the move myself due to a technical limitation, and I don't think it could be considered non-controversial given it's based on a separate discussion so I couldn't just request the move without being sure of the consensus. QuietHere (talk) 08:51, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking through Google Scholar, the sources seem to be capitalizing pretty consistently, and the Ngrams point in the same direction (even taking into account the fact that capitalized versions are over-represented). As it stands, I'm thinking this may be the rare case where the MOS:CAPS threshold is met: at minimum, I'd need stronger evidence before I'd be comfortable supporting. Another thought: this topic is usually described as the Old French Crusade Cycle rather than the stand-alone Crusade Cycle; although it's less concise, it does seem to be the common name. Perhaps a move to that title would be best. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:12, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The "Old French Crusade Cycle" is the title of the series published by the University of Alabama (which may be why "Crusade Cycle" is overrepresented). But for the cycle in general, I see examples of "crusade cycle", "Crusade cycle", and "Crusade Cycle" so I don't know what this page should be... Adam Bishop (talk) 11:32, 7 September 2022 (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.
 * Support There is no intrinsic reason to capitalise and the comments above would indicate that this is not consistently capped in sources per MOS:CAPS. Cinderella157 (talk) 12:10, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Relisted to solicit more data analysis supporting one way or another; only an opponent has presented data so far (albeit it was challenged). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:23, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per previous RMs and to be WP:CONSISTENT with other similar articles. "Crusade cycle" isn't a proper name like "The Lord of the Rings"; it's a descriptive phrase.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)