Talk:Opium War

Move?

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved &mdash;innotata 16:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Opium War → —
 * I am requesting to move "Opium War" to "Opium Wars" in order to free up "Opium War" for a notable Afghan film, which was an oscar submission and winner of several international film festivals, including the Rome Film Festival. Currently "Opium War" is redirected to "Opium Wars" and consequently is using the title of the Afghan film.  Opium Wars is a Chinese film and also uses the wikipedia name of "Opium Wars".
 * See links:
 * Opium War: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0497951/
 * Opium Wars: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars
 * 13:24, 26 April 2010 User:Josefacarson
 * Probably best to create it at Opium War (20XX film) where XX is the proper year. Then a disambiguation page can be created or the hatnote on Opium Wars can be made to include the new article. – xeno talk 13:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose move, support this solution. Film names should not take priority over history. GyroMagician (talk) 07:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Opium Wars is also taken and is used for the Opium Wars. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support/Oppose WP:RECENTISM and as the Opium Wars are wars that are each called an Opium War, it seems like the appropriate target for the redirect "Opium War" to point to. A dab page should be created at Opium War (disambiguation) but both "Opium War" and "Opium Wars" should point to the same article, that about the 19th century wars. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 23:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be blunt, but this suggestion of putting more importance on a film over an actual war is probably one of the most reckless proposal I've seen. You really got the priorities wrong. With 2 separate wars, it is definitely more important than just a movie. Oppose move and neutral stance on alternative proposals. OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose What xeno suggests is the usual, and in my view correct, way of handling situations where too things have the same name. Nick-D (talk) 09:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not proposing to place more importance on a film than a war of course and would never do that.  I am trying to be accurate and the Chinese Opium Wars are usually referred to in the plural.  The description on the Wikipedia page discusses them in the plural.  I would like to take the suggestion of xeno.  Which is better in your opinion - a disambiguation or a hatnote?Josefacarson (talk) 12:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I think Opium War and Opium Wars are two terms so closely related that it is reasonable to assume that a reader typing in either of the terms is looking for the same article. Opium Wars is, I believe, clearly established as a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and should not be disambiguated. Therefore, per WP:NCF, the Afghan film should be named Opium War (2008 Afghan film) and Opium War and Opium Wars should remain as interchangeable terms for the same article to which they currently link. I do support creation of Opium War (disambiguation) to clear up any possible confusion. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:02, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Therefore, I will withdraw the suggestion for the move and name it Opium War 2008 film. Thanks for the comments.  Josefacarson (talk) 13:42, 27 April 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.