Talk:Silajit Majumder

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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. 

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:16, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Shilajeet Majumdar → Silajit – Relisted is proper format. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 10:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC) The singer on his personal website refers to himself as Silajit. Further, he does the same on his official Facebook page. Therefore, requesting move. --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 16:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose but relisting. See WP:AT for the policy on article titles, and official names for an essay explaining some relevant aspects of the policy. It's possible that there's a case for the move in terms of policy, but it hasn't been made above, in fact there isn't any attempt to do so. Andrewa (talk) 19:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Which section of the article you are talking about? but it hasn't been made above, in fact there isn't any attempt to do so. - Please explain. --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 01:07, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No section of the article. I'm fascinated... why do you ask this?
 * Explanation... I'm a bit surprised any is necessary, but I'll try.
 * Wikipedia has a policy, article titles, to which the instructions at Requested moves and the header of this Requested move section both refer. In both places it's stated that requests for article moves should refer to this policy. Mostly this is by showing that the move conforms to the policy, but occasionally it may be by showing why the policy should not apply. But in either case, we need to consider the policy. Are you with me so far?
 * This proposal ignores the policy and instead just gives a personal opinion as to what the article name should be. It may be a very good opinion, but that's not the way we work here, as stated in many places, see above. And there are good reasons for this, but that's probably enough explanation for a start. Any clearer? Andrewa (talk) 00:54, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.