Talk:San Juan Bautista de Corias

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. 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 to move. With two in favor, one opposed, and one saying "I'm not really sure it needs to be moved", I don't see a strong feeling that the article should be moved. One editor mentioned other monasteries in the same category, but in general, we tend to see about 50% of monasteries listed have 'abbey' or 'monastery' in the name and half do not. If the article had moved, consensus would have leaned toward 'Abbey of San Juan Bautista de Corias'. One editor argued that the full formal name of the institution would include the term "abbey". The formal name doesn't carry much weight under our policy, since we tend to go for common names. EdJohnston (talk) 17:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

San Juan Bautista de Corias → San Juan Bautista de Corias Abbey – The current title is vague and not in line with other articles listed in its category. Daniel the Monk (talk) 14:03, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. If moved, and I'm really not sure it needs to be, then it should be to Abbey of San Juan Bautista de Corias, which reads much better. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The current title is not at all vague. If consensus favours a move, I agree with Necrothesp that "Abbey of San Juan Bautista de Corias" is a better solution. Srnec (talk) 23:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support. How is the current title not vague, since it gives no indication as to whether the article is about a city, street or river? Almost all the other monasteries listed in the category into which this one falls have the word "monastery" in the title. Why shouldn't this one? I also prefer the format proposed by Necrothesp, but I have found other editors insist on placing the type of institution at the end. Daniel the Monk (talk) 06:00, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It is not the job of the title to tell you what kind of thing the article is about, but rather what it is called. This title is not vague because the name used is not used of any other thing. Srnec (talk) 06:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That is the point of my proposed change. The full formal name of the institution would include the term "abbey", as do the other monasteries in the category. This form is an abbreviation. Daniel the Monk (talk) 15:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Support Based on the current name, I would've assumed it was about a person. I agree with Srnec's above comment inasmuch as an article title should be WP:PRECISE, but it also needs to be recognizable. I prefer the wording suggested by Necrothesp. --BDD (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2013 (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.