Talk:Robin Hood (2009 film)

Written like an ad
This article is written like an advertisement... --12.72.58.136 (talk) 23:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 24 October 2017

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Page not moved. Request was withdrawn and there was no support for the move. --  Dane talk  22:01, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (2009 film) → Robinn Hood – Original title per censor certificate issued by CBFC and the title shown in the film. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 17:51, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:22, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

If common name is to be considered then it should be simply Robin Hood (2009 film) as internet calls it -, , , , , , , , , , exception being IMDb, probably imitated Wiki or vice versa. Prince of Thieves is not part of the title anyway. They call it Robin Hood because they don't know there exist an additional n. If Robinn Hood is confusing, then it should be changed to Robinn Hood (film). --Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 08:11, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * But what it its usual name now? And the slight spelling change "Robinn" is not much of a distinguisher. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:22, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Its IMDB Page lists it at its current name. Per WP:COMMONNAME its "original" name does not matter for the purposes of Wikipedia. Even if it was moved to "Robinn Hood" it would still require the disambiguator as it would be too confusing.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:36, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose move. Per Zxcvbnm, "Robinn Hood" would be too confusing. I also believe the current title is the common name anyway.  ONR  (talk) 00:41, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Request withdrawn. --Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 10:35, 27 October 2017 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2 November 2017

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus. We have the proposer and one supporter opposed by one other editor, and this RM has been relisted three times. There does not seem to be a strong agreement to rename this page; however, there is no problem if any editor wishes to try again to garner consensus to do so. Happy Holidays! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth   put'r there 16:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (2009 film) → Robin Hood (2009 film) – Per WP:COMMONNAME -, , , , , , , , ,. Film's original title is "Robinn Hood" as shown in film and per the censor certificate issued by CBFC. "Prince of Thieves" is not part of the title. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 11:43, 2 November 2017 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 15:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. — usernamekiran (talk)   20:30, 17 November 2017 (UTC)   --Relisting. for the last time. — usernamekiran (talk)  07:01, 28 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Support റോബിൻഹുഡ്  is the title, no need for the extra bit. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:22, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now. It is more concise, but I'm just not seeing that it's more common to call the film "Robin Hood" without "Prince of Thieves". Many of the given links clearly include the "Prince of Thieves" bit, or call it "Robinhood".--Cúchullain t/ c 17:44, 17 November 2017 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 5 January 2018

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by page mover) --  Dane talk  18:47, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (2009 film) → Robin Hood (2009 film) – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Unlike Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, here "Prince of Thieves" is not a sub-title, it is a caption used in the poster. Original theatrical release name is Robinn Hood. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 09:01, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Question Can you please explain this thing about "original theatrical" name having two n's please? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * : As per the censor certificate issued by CBFC and per the title shown in the film (certificate at opening and title at 1:32). Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 19:09, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I have no idea why they did the two n's, but if that is not a common name then we can rule that out for sure. Could you provide some evidence for the common name, as I am having difficulty in determining from searching Google. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:06, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * :, , , , , , , , റോബിൻ ഹുഡ് (2009 ചലച്ചിത്രം). Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 10:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * For future reference I would say that the first four can't be used for determining a common name as they would be provided officially. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:38, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Support based upon above discussion. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:38, 10 January 2018 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.