Talk:Government of the Australian Capital Territory

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:07, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ACTGov inline black.svg

Requested move 28 September 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: Consensus to not move. (closed by non-admin page mover)   SITH   (talk)   12:48, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Government of the Australian Capital Territory → ACT Government – This move request brings this article in-line with other Australian government articles: Australian Government, Queensland Government, Victoria State Government, as well as New Zealand Government. As per the common name policy (Google Trends). official name policy (ACT Government website), government naming conventions, the conciseness policy and the abbreviations in article titles policy, this article should be called "ACT Government". "ACT Government" is unambiguous and is what the government is called in the very very significant majority of scholarly and academic sources (Google Ngrams - because of the length of the phrase, you can't fit in all 6 words, but the first five should capture all mentions). ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 06:11, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose move. See also the multiple attempts to move Government of New South Wales, unsurprisingly by the same person. (This is malformed anyway, as both should have been part of the same move request.)  O.N.R.  (talk) 07:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * There's been one discussion on the NSW Government page to which I didn't have a chance to address the concern, and a new one that I've opened today. That's perfectly fine that I wasn't able to address the old RM, but the policy that the concern was derived from actually supports using abbreviations. And yes, you shouldn't really be surprised that someone who's successfully RMed four other Australia/NZ government articles is going to RM others that have similar issues - what are you trying to assert by saying "unsurprisingly by the same person"? There are different reasonings for these two requests, each relying on separate evidence; it would have been inappropriate for me to include them together otherwise you'd end up with a rationale the size of an encyclopedia itself. Anyways, I actually originally RMed Government of New South Wales to New South Wales Government a few days ago, but I updated my suggested destination today, so it didn't make sense to just completely restart when I could just update the existing RM. Similarly, do you have any actual objections to this move other than the fact that I'm the one who put it forward? ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 09:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose ACT is far from easily comprehensible to readers outside Australia, probably does have other meanings in other countries. PatGallacher (talk) 13:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per MOS:ACROTITLE. There is a high bar for using acronyms in titles, and this article doesn't reach it. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * (this also applies to 's comments) WP:NCA provides two tests for assessing if a acronym is appropriate: if it's common, and if its meaning is recognisable. As I've already demonstrated, "ACT Government" is very common and very prolific, and the test it provides to check recognisability shows that it is recognisable: the first result is "Australian Capital Territory", and more so, none of the possible other meanings make sense (despite Pat's fortune telling). ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 05:46, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose this proposal (abbreviation), Support only to Australian Capital Territory Government, which aligns with the "(place) + Government" convention. Marcnut1996 (talk) 01:35, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm perfectly happy with Australian Capital Territory Government if the consensus is that an acronym isn't appropriate. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 05:46, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose for reasons given by others. Questzonz (talk) 06:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Please see this statement about "per others" as reasoning. If you wouldn't mind, what's your objections based on? ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 06:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * comment while the Government of New South Wales is rarely spoken as "NSW Government" the Government of the Australian Capital Territory is often spoken as its acronym. Serprinss (talk) 09:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Abbreviations are usually a terrible idea. Far clearer as it is. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:17, 30 September 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.