Talk:List of Puerto Rico symbols

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:17, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * 2012-ATB-Quarters-Proof-El-Yunque.jpg

Requested move 27 August 2021

 * 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: moved to List of Puerto Rico symbols.

Discussion has happily resulted in consensus to move List of Puerto Rico symbols.

Had consensus not been reached, I would have reverted to the previous name. (non-admin closure) Havelock Jones (talk) 07:44, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

List of Puerto Rico territorial symbols → List of official symbols of Puerto Rico – Undiscussed move. Mercy11 (talk) 20:42, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)


 * your original move of this was also undiscussed, and this reverted the article to where it was originally. If I were you I'd leave it at the current title for now and open an RM to settle this. Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 03:06, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * True, but after Mercy11 moved it, it stayed there for a year and a half with no objection. I think that makes the most recent stable name. I agree it should be moved back to  as a procedural revert. Then you can open a discussion of whether it should be moved to  again. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 04:44, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , Thank you. I was just responsing with pretty much the same thing but ended up with an edit conflict (with you!) Mercy11 (talk) 05:09, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * your observation speaks in favor of my request, for it demonstrates that the move made by my opponent was --already-- controversial. Sure I would like to discuss this new move in its entirety. However, I take exception to the argument you are making against my request for my move took place a 1-1/2 years ago and, though undiscussed, it was never disputed by anyone, so it's a moot point now as an argument against my request. It is, however, clearly an argument against my opponent's move, for we know that a page that has been moved shouldn't be moved back to where it was originally (as he did) without discussion because such move is, by definition, controversial. That said, while your suggestion is well taken, the burden today is on my opponent to open the suggested RM to settle this. Please fulfill my request so my opponent can follow up with the suggested RM, and we can get started on a clean slate.  Thanks, Mercy11 (talk) 05:09, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Given both moves were undiscussed the way to resolve this is through RM, not reverting the move. So is correct, an RM is now required to resolve the issue. The page should remain in its current state until the discussion is resolved. Polyamorph (talk) 14:11, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I've opened the discussion for you here. Polyamorph (talk) 14:14, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Support move to List of officials symbols of Puerto Rico. The suggested title more accurately describes what the contents of the article are: something "official" is something approved by a government law. This approach is consistent with similar list articles whose contents cite the law (e.g., here, here, here, etc.), as opposed to what is each editor's personal perception of what is/is not a symbol based on their own personal reflection/experience. Personal perceptions are not good as they can make the list grow almost endlessly, which would be undesirable. For example, here editors were claiming that Coqui, Reina mora, Maga, and Ceiba were all symbols, but none of they were, which explains why no RSs were provided; and here the article stated Puerto Rico had an official motto and nickname but neither could be validated because they weren't. Also here there were claims that El Morro, La Fortaleza, and Castillo San Cristóbal were all symbols of PR but none of them were official. Worse, the same version claimed that the Coqui, the Reina mora, and the Ceiba were official symbols but none of them were. The current title lends itself to edits based on personal reflections; the suggested title does not. Mercy11 (talk) 20:18, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: No opinion on the move, would support temporarily reverting to List of official symbols of Puerto Rico as the most recent stable title, as well as that title holding should "No consensus" be the result. BilledMammal (talk) 06:19, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Support move to List of official symbols of Puerto Rico. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 11:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , the user who moved the page to this title. Natg 19 (talk) 02:26, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose None of the other items in Template:State symbols include "official" and there's no reason to include it here. Moreover, there is no reason whatsoever to limit the article to "official" symbols. Washington does not have an official motto, but it's discussed at List_of_Washington_state_symbols. Indiana's nickname The Hoosier State is traditional, not official, but we still list it at List_of_Indiana_state_symbols. List of Maryland state symbols has the traditional motto and nicknames, and List of Oregon state symbols and List of Minnesota state symbols have sections for unofficial symbols. All of these are featured lists!, you linked to List of Illinois state symbols, but it also includes the unofficial nickname "The Prairie State". Your linked List of Massachusetts state symbols does only have legislated symbols (except the hero was only introduced in the legislature, not passed) but it doesn't need the word "official" in the title to do that! Of course the law should be cited where so designated, but this does not need to be in the title or limit the list. Intelligent editors can describe the contents well here and still exclude El Morro, reina mora, and ceiba, or – if editors want to – include other unofficial but widely recognized symbols with context and sources. The lack of attention the article got in the past that allowed low-quality unsourced content does not mean we're now incapable of limiting the article to reliably-sourced material without that in the name. Whatever the exact contents of the list, the title should be WP:CONCISE as well as WP:CONSISTENT: "official" is not needed in the title and is inconsistent with similar pages. I think inclusion of "territorial", like the others have "state", implies a level of wide recognition by itself anyway. Reywas92Talk 03:29, 3 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Puerto Rico is not a state; so, the argument to include or not include "official" in the article's title based on the claim that Template:State symbols doesn't include "official" in article names is WP:OTHERSTUFF. Yes, as you noted, some (or all; the number is irrelevant) of the 3 US states I pointed to (MA, IL, LA) include unofficial symbols in their state symbols articles, but so what? My point with those 3 states is that they follow the WP:V policy by making references to the corresponding laws that support the claims made in those articles. The use of a US state as example is quite common for, as most of us know, articles from US states are generally more mature in content than those of just about any other jurisdiction and are thus a good guide to follow content-wise, given that they have generally undergone more discussion and scrutiny than those about non-US state jurisdictions. If PR was a state, then we could consider claims that 'because other states do it such and such way, we should do it here too', but Puerto Rico isn't a state yet. In addition, without discussion, you moved the article to a title that has political undertones by your inclusion of the word "territorial". The use of "territorial" is a second reason why your choice of title was not good. The current territorial status of Puerto Rico is a hotly debated issue, and we don't need to name the article in any politically-leaning manner, but stay neutral instead. In summary, we need to ensure that articles follow WP:V as much as possible and maintain neutrality. The title that was there before (i.e., the title we are requesting your move be reverted back to) does both of these, but your undiscussed move away from the former title containing "official" and, worse yet, to a title containing "territorial" does neither. As such, the title you are supporting comes short in at least those two areas. Puerto Rico isn't a state; so let's not politize the article's title by bringing in arguments based on politics, as both of your arguments above are. Mercy11 (talk) 02:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Puerto Rico is a territory, whether people like it or not. Piss off with your suggestion that I'm politicizing it by stating the basic fact of reality that is absolutely neutral (we'd change the name were this factual status to change, on which I have no opinion), as well as your pot-calling-kettle-black of "In addition, without discussion". This is likewise consistent with the other four territories like List of U.S. Virgin Islands territorial symbols if you don't want to compare this to states. Sure, we could remove "territorial" and use List of Puerto Rico symbols (like List of District of Columbia symbols) or something else perhaps, but it's still unnecessary to include "official", being inconsistent, inconsise, unnecessary to include, and unnecessary to limit the article in such a way. Reywas92Talk 00:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I support to remove "territorial" and use List of Puerto Rico symbols (like List of District of Columbia symbols). Remove "official", remove "territorial". Not for any reason except it's a list of symbols. Also because "territorial" symbols, as opposed to ocean or air symbols? Seems a weird article name to include "territorial". WP:OTHERSTUFF - so what the states say State Symbols.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 03:43, 7 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose I largely agree with Reywas92's analysis. The current title is more consistent with the sibling articles listed at Template:State symbols, and the addition of "official" seems like an unnecessary restriction of scope, given that the article could plausibly include verifiable unofficial symbols as some sibling articles do. I normally consider consistency to be the least important of the WP:CRITERIA, but this is one of the rare cases where it's a major consideration, when we have a family of closely related articles. They're all structured the same way, they live together in the same category, they're listed together in a navbox, and, all else being equal, they should have parallel names. Colin M (talk) 01:01, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, if we can agree on removing "territorial" from the title, I would also agree to removing "official". Mercy11 (talk) 04:16, 7 September 2021 (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.
 * Apparent Consensus: List of Puerto Rico symbols. There has been no further discussion here in close to 2 weeks, and the agreement appears to be to move the page to "List of Puerto Rico symbols." If there are no objections, I will ask an uninvolved mover/admin to move the page and close the discussion. Mercy11 (talk) 01:58, 20 September 2021 (UTC)