Talk:International Hockey League (1992–1996)

Requested move 13 April 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: page moved. wbm1058 (talk) 12:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

International Hockey League (1992–96) → International Hockey League (1992–1996) – This should really be a non-controversial move per MOS:DATERANGE, but move log says otherwise. Really see no reason why this shouldn't follow the guideline here. Gonnym (talk) 11:22, 13 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - No reason to not follow the guideline. Primergrey (talk) 12:19, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I accidently sleptwalk and changed it. Must be the Ambien the Britannicans slipped me. But more seriously, Goonnym inferred that the "move" coding wouldn't allow this Wikipedia-style compliant change, so I tried it, and it worked. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:37, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't infer that. What I said is that the move log says that moving it per MOS:DATERANGE is controversial as it has 01:00, 30 June 2015 Djsasso talk contribs moved page International Hockey League (1992–1996) to International Hockey League (1992–96) over redirect (rvt: its been at this title for almost a year. It would be you who would not need consensus for your move. plus mos:date. --Gonnym (talk) 23:54, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Then I read into your nomination, my mistake. This type of move is normal, and myself and others have been looking for and changing titles to the full date when not consecutive (per Wikipedia style) for quite awhile now. The controversial definition you mention came from 2015, and seems no longer applicable as I believe the style guide was changed after that. In any case, you were right in saying in your nom that this should have been a non-controversial move. My going ahead and changing it came in good faith but per my misunderstanding that the problem was in coding (thinking 'move log' meant a type of code wouldn't allow your computer to move the page, and then testing that inference). Good find by the way, each one of these full-year non-consecutive titles that are found and changed is one less to go. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * As mentioned by Randy Kryn MOS:DATERANGE back then required that format. -DJSasso (talk) 12:57, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. No reason not to follow the guideline, which is a good one as we should avoid abbreviating. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:29, 15 April 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.