Talk:People v. Murray

Requested move 21 April 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: No consensus -- there are a couple of alternative targets. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 01:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

California v. Murray → People v. Murray – Per MOS:LEGAL, "unless needed for specificity, leave state names out of the title, e.g., use State v. Elliott, not State of Vermont v. Raleigh Elliott, et al., and redirect the latter to the former." Official title seems to be People (of the state of CA) v. Murray Natg 19 (talk) 03:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support: The short title of this case is People v. Murray. If it went up to the U.S. Supreme Court it could be retitled to California v. Murray, but I don't think that's happening. MOS:LAW plainly applies here and there's no rationale I've seen to depart from that guideline. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 01:58, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support rename as People v. Murray (2011): Per MOS:LEGAL "Ambiguous titles like "People v. Superior Court", or "United States v. Smith", are written with the full name of the state and distinguishing name of individual or entity, or distinguishing year, in parenthesis. If still further clarification is needed, then a comma and the year may be added after the identifying individual name." Requested move is too ambiguous and confuses readers of this page with People v. Murray (1859). Phillip Samuel (talk) 07:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I was unaware of this other article. I support this rename to avoid confusion. Natg 19 (talk) 16:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support move to the originally-proposed People v. Murray, not to People v. Murray (2011); as between the 2011 trial and the 1859 criminal case that's the subject of the People v. Murray (1859) article, the 2011 case appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The redirect hatnote currently on the article should be changed to a the usual WP:TWODABS disambiguation hatnote (probably about) to point out People v. Murray (1859). It also makes sense to create a redirect at People v. Murray (2011). TJRC (talk) 16:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per . This case is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for People v. Murray which is already established by this title currently being a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to this article. I see no argument for this case not being the primary topic. --В²C ☎ 20:03, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Move review
I asked for a Move review at Move_review/Log/2021_June. —В²C ☎ 05:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)