Talk:Elasund

Page name
I think this article should be called simple "Elasund", as that is the way people refer to the game and how they are likely to look it up. If an article is created about the fictional city of Elasund as it relates to the novel, then KevSYC's latest point might have more weight, but until then, I believe that games subtitles are as unnecessary in article titles as book subtitles are. Move history:


 * 05:46, 20 February 2007 KelvSYC moved Elasund to Elasund: The First City over redirect: Subtitle is significant - Elasund by itself refers to the Catan novel's setting, while The First City refers to the game itself


 * 13:50, 9 November 2006 JHunterJ moved Elasund: The First City to Elasund: Use most common name; see also Naming conventions (books)
 * 20:34, 6 November 2006 KelvSYC moved Elasund to Elasund: The First City: Subtitles form part of the full name, and is thus necessary


 * 20:07, 15 September 2006 JHunterJ moved Elasund: The First City to Elasund: revert move; subtitle not needed in article title
 * 19:37, 15 September 2006 KelvSYC moved Elasund to Elasund: The First City: move to full title

-- JHunterJ 14:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree -- the game is generally referred to as simply "Elasund." The novel possibly deserves its own page, but there should at least be a tag at the top: This page is about the novel. For the boardgame based on the novel, see...". -- dcclark (talk) 14:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * BTW, the novel isn't called Elasund, it's called Die Siedler von Catan. Apparently it includes reference to the city of Elasund within. -- JHunterJ 17:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to disagree. If you had your way, we'd move articles such as Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots (to Metal Gear Solid 4), Pokémon XD: Gale of Darkness (to Pokémon XD), Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (to Borat (film)), or Descent: Journeys in the Dark (to Descent (board game)). kelvSYC (talk) 21:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Discuss before moving, not discuss while moving. Consensus (above) was established.  There may be other editors who agree with you (and disagree with me and dcclark above).  If so, a move may be warranted, but not until then. -- JHunterJ (talk) 02:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * When was consensus established? I disagree with your position, we don't have consensus. Plain and simple.  What you are doing is contrary to what's established in the articles I cited, and I don't think that it's appropriate to cite book naming convention for board games when the opposite is applying to much more relevant media.  If you still feel the same way, you can take it up with the people who decide things over at WP:NAME - I currently have an RFC at its talk page. kelvSYC (talk) 04:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The articles you cite do not establish consensus here; consensus here was established before and can certainly be shown to have changed, simple yes, but not plain unless another editor agrees with you. You made a bold edit (move), it was reverted, and now we're discussing here, and I guess at WT:NAME -- JHunterJ (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)