Talk:Reno Silver Sox (Golden Baseball League)

Requested 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: Pages moved. I recommend that editors check the links to Reno Silver Sox. Ucucha 14:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Reno Silver Sox → Reno Silver Sox (Golden Baseball League) — The team that currently has the "(minor league team)" disambiguation had over 40 years of history and affiliation with Major League Baseball teams. On the other hand, the GBL team, currently at the disambiguous ambiguous title, existed under this name for 3 seasons. Ghits will be skewed in favor of the GBL team because it played in the internet age while the MiLB team disbanded in 1992. The GBL article also has a lot more inlinks but I suspect that a lot of them, including several MLB team season articles, are intended to point to the MiLB team, therefore I do think that the MiLB team is the primary topic. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 20:21, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Reno Silver Sox (minor league team) → Reno Silver Sox


 * Support - This seems like a reasonable move to me. NatureBoyMD (talk) 15:40, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support - I would also agree that this is a reasonable move. I can understand keeping the name the way it is if the team was active, however, they are now defunct. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 23:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment -Since the GBL team still exists as the Tucson Toros, do they even need a page under their old name? I'd just suggest merging the minor league article into this one and editing the GBL section to a small bit that points out that they are now in Tucson with a link to that article. Spanneraol (talk) 23:54, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That is often the case with MiLB or independant league articles. Take for example the Albuquerque Dukes who were the Los Angeles Angels (PCL), and who are now the Portland Beavers. I'm not taking a position, I'm just adding to a point. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 01:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * One combined article still accomplishes that task...Spanneraol (talk) 05:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It just seems (to me) a bit excessive in most cases. Take to note Pacific Coast League. If we combine one, we should combine all, and I just think that the franchise in the city should be the point of the team article (as it is now). If anything, we should combine this with the minor league article because it is essentially the same franchise, just under a new league. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 06:20, 16 March 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.