Talk:Military Order of Aviz

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Order of Aviz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080314160958/http://www.ordens.presidencia.pt/pdf/EstrangeirosCondNacionais.pdf to http://www.ordens.presidencia.pt/pdf/EstrangeirosCondNacionais.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:46, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 21 September 2022

 * 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: No move UtherSRG (talk) 01:35, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Military Order of Aviz → Order of Aviz – twice moved since 2021 without discussion&#32;Srnec (talk) 01:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:22, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2022 (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.
 * @Liz Given that you performed the second move after the first move was done by a sock, do you mind if the page being moved back to the original title as requested above? – robertsky (talk) 13:13, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, I had to look into this to see why I moved this page and for that, I had to look at the deleted edits for the page. It was a CSD G6 move request by User:RickMorais who offered the reason of "outdated name". Typically, in these cases, I look to see if the request seems reasonable and the editor requesting a page move is an experienced editor which I thought was true in this case. But I don't have an opinion on whether or not the page should remain at this title. RickMorais might have an opinion so I'll ping him now. Liz Read! Talk! 06:20, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The "outdated name" the above refers to was "Military Order of Saint Benedict of Aviz", which the page was was moved to incorrectly and unilaterally in March 2021. That name was only in use up to 1910, the time the Portuguese monarchy ended and the new republican regime temporarily abolished it. It has been officially called "Ordem Militar de Avis" ("Military Order of Avis"), ever since it was restored in 1917 as a military decoration following WWI, per Decree no. 3384, 25 September 1917.
 * The "Military" bit reflects the fact that it was historically a military order: it shares that designation with the other three highest decorations in the Portuguese honours system: the Military Order of the Tower and Sword, the Military Order of Christ, and the Military Order of Saint James of the Sword (collectivelly called "the Ancient Military Orders" — source, Official Website of the Portuguese Honours System). The word is sometimes dropped in common parlance ("Order of Aviz", "Order of Christ", etc.), but in my opinion all four article titles should match, for consistency (and all other three use the word "Military"). RickMorais (talk) 17:39, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I think RickMorais's references are authoritative on the name, long and short versions. I agree that more important than having one name or the other is to have the same rule for the three Orders. That is, either "Military Order of ..." or "Order of ..." for all. I favor going for "Military Order of ..." (meaning do not move in the main scope of this discussion). Because it is the full name, and the shorter version is (probably) mostly used when it is clear from the context it is a "military" order. The official site uses the short form, presumably because they are already under a heading "Military Orders", it would be redundant (and less clear) to say the same one by one. Here each page stands by itself (no heading...) so they better use the longer full name. (and the lead needs clean up, clarifying, after the names settle down) - Nabla (talk) 16:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)