Talk:Rallying

Requested move 12 June 2024
Rallying → Rally (motorsport) – "Rallying" remains vague, as it can apply in literally every other type of sport "rally" is a term as well as the stock market. It is not an adequate disambiguation. Britannica calls it "rally" so that's what I went with here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 21:12, 22 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 18:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Britannica does not care for sources or usage, or factual accuracies: for one, rallying by definition of any motorsport governing body is explicitly not racing like they say.
 * Your point sounds like it mixes Wikipedia articles for Wiktionary entries IMO. I never hear in other sports, or anybody at a political campaign rally that people are rallying to necessitate a move. There's nothing at Rally to suggest it needs to. Sure, a stock can be rallying, but is there ever likely to be an article for that?
 * Lastly, Rally (motorsport) sounds like a noun, an event, not the wider sport/discipline of rallying. Rally Wonk (talk) 16:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Support either Rally (motorsport) or Rallying (motorsport). No clear primary topic here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per King of Hearts -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 08:58, 14 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose Rallying is a sport in it's own right instead of being a description of something that can happen in other sports. It is a name. Noun vs verb. --Falcadore (talk) 11:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Rallying is an important political activity, so not just sports. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 21:01, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Political rallies have an alternative description and it's an activity with blurred distinction. Also "rallying" is not used to describe that act of a political rallies. Politics may have a claim on "rally", but not rallying. Rallying is the name of the sport. -- Falcadore (talk) 09:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose as unnecessary disambiguation. The other meanings for rallying relate to dictionary-style usage (WP:NOT). Prolog (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * We have articles on the others, such as political rally; to the general public, the political topic is likely primary, as the motorsports topic is niche. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 21:13, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Political rally redirects to political demonstration, which has 2,615 views in 30 days. Rallying has 15,392 views in the same period.
 * If Political rally is the common use, the redirect should be addressed before this proposal is necessary. Then, it should be discussed if Rally (politics) should be the correct article title.
 * I dispute your claim that the general public would see the political type first, especially outside North America. I'm certainly not able to recall usage of the term in the UK where I currently am.
 * As mentioned, article titles don't have to work like a dictionary. Disams and primary topics should be out of necessity, not completionism. Rally Wonk (talk) 22:20, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * In addition to the above, the word "rallying" never appears in that article. Prolog (talk) 15:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If you look at Google News "rallying", "rally", "rallies", they are almost all about the political concept, except for some about the economics concept. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 06:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The hits for "rallying" on Google News are 60% about the motorsport (30 out of the first 50 hits). Seven hits for the term "rallying cry". Four were about the stock market and another four about cryptocurrency. Two hits for political rallying and basketball, and one for baseball. Nobody disputes the multiple meanings for "rally" and "rallies". Prolog (talk) 07:45, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed - nobody disputes the multiple meaning.
 * Google News uses profiling to give tailored results, it is not helpful to measure against as we don't know what of your personal information Google is using. I don't log in and am privacy conscious, the first 5 results I got was through prose - '(Politician/football manager) issues rallying cry/call'. It's not a topic, just a dictionary term being hit. The sixth result is "Rallying - Rovanpera overtakes Mikkelsen in Poland". That is topical use. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose as noted by Rally Wonk, Political rally redirects to Political demonstration which has an order of magnitude fewer page views that the current page. Polyamorph (talk) 08:31, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Revert back to Rally racing per WP:RETAIN. See this talk page discussion from 2004-2005. It appears that the article was originally created as Rally racing and subsequently moved to Rallying by User:Loganberry. 162 etc. (talk) 22:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Interestingly, Category:Rally racing was never moved, and is inconsistent with the current article title. 162 etc. (talk) 22:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * On my user page you can read that Rally racing began as the official term in the United States by governing bodies that did not comply with the authority of the FIA, the international governing body for Rallying with member organisations in 200 territories. The FIA officially describes rallying as not racing. Category:Rallying also exists. There could be separate articles, but there is evidently no demand to contribute to what is an American name.
 * If there are sources for use of Rally racing from outside of the USA, it would support this proposal, else, I can't help but feel this point is USA vs ROTW for the second time. Rally Wonk (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:RETAIN is very clear on this: "With few exceptions (...), there is no valid reason for changing from one acceptable option to another (English variety.)" "Rally racing" is synonymous with rallying, and that's the name that was used when the article was created.  There is no valid reason not to use Rally racing as the article's title. 162 etc. (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * A comment on the reasons already given why Rally racing is not an acceptable option would be helpful. Rally Wonk (talk) 21:39, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Perhaps "Rally racing" isn't the term FIA prefers, but it meets WP:COMMONNAME, and I don't see any reason to deviate from our Manual of Style.
 * Whether "Rally racing" is used outside of American English is also irrelevant; see WP:ENGVAR. 162 etc. (talk) 23:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * There's a touch of ignorance, disrespect and tunnel vision there. The rest of the world is irrelevant? Rally racing would have come long after, and as result of, the breakdown of AAA in the 50s, which itself came 45 years after the first rallies.
 * If the reliable sources exist for the current content under rally racing, please share some we could use with particular focus to:
 * Touring concentrations
 * Rallying on roads open to public traffic
 * Cross-country
 * Navigational rallies
 * TSDs
 * Eco-rallies
 * It seems to me you are on a personal mission to move a page for the sake of moving it, shaping arguments using any policies and archived conversations you can find, whilst showing no regard for having any understanding of the article subject itself. Rally Wonk (talk) 00:55, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * And it seems to me that you are completely disregarding well-established policies and guidelines in the name of keeping a title which fits well with your personal biases. 162 etc. (talk) 01:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I accept the policies and guidelines in general. I challenged applying them to this article based on the facts and sources available. Then, I disregarded the irrelevant policies you mentioned.
 * Nobody supports your proposal, let's not waste our energies discussing this any further. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:RETAIN, WP:ENGVAR, and WP:COMMONNAME are certainly not "irrelevant", and I trust that the closer of this discussion will uphold the policies and guidelines on which this encyclopedia is built. 162 etc. (talk) 16:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Google Books has 1600 hits for "rallying" "world rally championship" and 200 hits for "rally racing" "world rally championship". 1500 hits for "rallying" "audi quattro" and 90 hits "rally racing" "audi quattro". "Rally racing" is clearly not the common name and the page was appropriately moved 20 years ago. Prolog (talk) 15:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment: The proposal does not suggest that Rallying should be used for anything like a disambiguation. After this move, Rallying would redirect to the new article. As the first eight words of the article are "Rallying is a wide-ranging form of motorsport...; the argument behind the proposal (that 'Rallying is vague'), is rather weak. Isn't it the case that if one wants to find out more about something, maybe they should read the article, not just the title?
 * Rally Wonk (talk) 23:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Except that if you look through Google News, you will not find the motorsports topic, you will instead find the political one and the business one. Thus, motorsports isn't primary. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 06:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This is false, as noted above. The motorsport is the primary topic for "rallying" on Google News. Prolog (talk) 07:45, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The motorsport term is the primary topic because no other rallying article exists. That's different to notability or commonality which is maybe what you are trying to say? It's very hard to understand the need for disambiguation when:
 * Rallying (political) does not exist, and Political rally redirects to another article - meaning it is not even the primary topic within its own topic.
 * Rally (tennis) is a dictionary definition and not worthy of an article. It says see also Glossary of tennis terms which has the same content. I cannot read about the history of rallying in tennis, who the great rallying players are... There's not really anywhere this article can go.
 * Rally (stock market) is another dictionary definition, again not worthy of article. It probably is already, but should be another line in a glossary.
 * I'm not doubting use of the word rally or rallying or even whether they are topics. I question whether these are topics to be covered by an encyclopaedia article. Following that, is the need to disambiguate. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:57, 1 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose. This is the by far the most primary encyclopedic usage for "rallying". The proposal is definitely a solution looking for a problem. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment: Relist, to allow additional discussion both of the proposed title and the alternative of Rally racing BilledMammal (talk) 18:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: Don't know the answer here but noting that if you don't know what Rallying is supposed to be about, Rally race or Rally (motorsport) definitely make it clear. That said, sometimes terms are just bad and you have to use them. Mrfoogles (talk) 23:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * On consideration: Oppose by common name. Mrfoogles (talk) 23:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Support, the political and financial markets meanings are common enough to make clarification of the title here usefull. Newystats (talk) 11:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose - disam page for other usages works as they currently stand. Pelmeen10 (talk) 12:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Per WP:COMMONNAME. Hansen Sebastian Talk 05:29, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It does seem inconsistent to have the noun disambiguated but not the verb. How can we really tell that only one of these is ambiguous for the average English reader (note, not just the average politics fan or a sports fan)? --Joy (talk) 09:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joy The verb here is the noun, it's the common name of the discipline/sport. It's not commonly known as motorsport rallying, car rallying, rally racing etc. Until another rallying use case article exists there's no policy to suggest it needs to be disambiguated. Anybody who reads the first sentence of this article is immediately informed what it is about. It makes sense to disam rally because of the articles that do exist. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That's not what I'm saying. The average reader may well also recognize the sport as simply "rally", and know other things as "rallying". We're making those readers to go through extra navigation elements, but not those who recognize the sport as "rallying". How do we measure that the size of the former two contingents of readers is significantly smaller than the size of the latter? --Joy (talk) 16:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * To me, the common name is for the benefit of the average reader. Rallying is already listed on Rally and when I type 'rally' in the search box, rallying is the first suggested article, so I'm not sure where the extra steps are.
 * A good comparison here is auto racing, truck racing, motorcycle racing, boat racing etc... they are all doing words split from racing, (handily disambiguated already but rallying cannot justify this, especially as some rallies have various vehicles in the same event). Like rally, there are many different definitions of race. I could argue that racing should refer to those other forms too, say the the candidates are racing to the White house in the 'election race' found in 'other uses', but there is no encyclopaedic content to create for it. I've asked a few times but still not seen where the encyclopaedic content for the other 'rallying' things is. It still sounds like as somebody mentioned already, this is trying to solve an invented problem.
 * For the record, I would accept this proposal if it's for the right reasons, but so far I am not understanding any. That's why I am involving myself heavily in this discussion. Rally Wonk (talk) 16:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That's the extra step, having to pick from the list. The same one that would be introduced if the motorsport article was moved. It's completely plausible that racing should be moved based on consistency, yes. --Joy (talk) 11:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * So there is scope for an encyclopaedic entry for Racing (election)? To me, it sounds like a dictionary entry for a word that would occasionally appear on Election or Elections in... articles, not a topic itself. I'm not seeing it at other encyclopaedias either, which is making it harder to understand this POV. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, on the contrary, I just don't have a very strict view of what is ambiguous - topics in the encyclopedia don't have to be standalone to be ambiguous in usage, or indeed significance. Obviously we don't want to cater to pure dictionary usage, but there's so much to organizing navigation around ambiguity beyond that. --Joy (talk) 09:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Seems like a rock-solid rationale there due to the phrase being ambiguous. Nothing else to add, really. Steel1943  (talk) 02:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)