Talk:List of California ballot propositions: 1970–1979

Requested move 17 September 2018

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus, therefore, not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 09:04, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

– Per WP:DATERANGE, the FULL four-digit years should be written out in any given date range on Wikipedia (with the exception of one-year periods which can be written either way: 1923–1924 or 1923–24). The above moves should be made to fit within Wikipedia's guidelines. See the similar requested move for the "History of the United States" pages, the "History of New York City" pages, and the "List of Florida/North Carolina/Texas hurricanes" pages.
 * List of California ballot propositions 1970–79 → List of California ballot propositions: 1970–1979
 * List of California ballot propositions 1980–89 → List of California ballot propositions: 1980–1989
 * List of California ballot propositions 1990–99 → List of California ballot propositions: 1990–1999
 * List of California ballot propositions 2000–09 → List of California ballot propositions: 2000–2009
 * List of California ballot propositions 2010–19 → List of California ballot propositions: 2010–2019

Also, it's helpful to have a comma colon (or something) to separate the two parts of the title, per WP:NCSPLITLIST. The version with just a space is no longer used. Paintspot Infez (talk) 21:07, 17 September 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. –Ammarpad (talk) 21:22, 24 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Question: any reason for the comma and not parenthesis? --Gonnym (talk) 19:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Nominator's comment - : The only reason I used commas is because I wasn't sure if it needed to be changed. WP:NCSPLITLIST has both the comma format and the parentheses format as acceptable; however, the preferred format is apparently with a colon. Just changed the requested move to colons, since it's the preferred format per the guideline (WP:NCSPLITLIST). Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:15, 20 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose per WP:IAR. WP:DATERANGE should be modified to allow for 2 digit end-year in cases like this where the intended range is blatantly obvious.  It already provides some leeway, it just needs to be expanded:
 * Two-digit ending years (1881–82, but never 1881–882 or 1881–2) be used in any of the following cases: (1) two consecutive years; (2) infoboxes and tables where space is limited (using a single format consistently in any given table column); and (3) in certain topic areas if there is a very good reason, such as matching the established convention of reliable sources.
 * I suggest we modify the first case to: (1) any range where the ending year is in the same decade as the starting year. That would mean 1999-2000 would require a 4-digit ending year even though they are two consecutive years, which I think is appropriate. In the mean time, IAR this well-meaning but silly guidance. --В²C ☎ 23:09, 24 September 2018 (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.