Talk:Social Democratic Party of Georgia

Requested move 9 January 2015

 * 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: Moved. EdJohnston (talk) 01:28, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Social Democratic Labour Party of Georgia → Social Democratic Party of Georgia – WP:COMMONNAME Ե րևանցի  talk  23:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC) I don't know where "Labour" comes from, but the party doesn't seem to have it in their name. Google Books search yields 1,240 results for "Social Democratic Party of Georgia" and only 35 for "Social Democratic Labour Party of Georgia"-- Ե րևանցի talk  23:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Support. The party was called SDP. --KoberTalk 08:15, 10 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Support GregKaye 09:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Support per everyone Red Slash 18:51, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * User:Yerevantsi, where do you get 1,240 results for SDPofG? I only get 16 using your link.  The common name of the party is the Georgian Menshevik Party with 22 hits (and another 8 hits for Menshevik Party of Georgia).  —  AjaxSmack   01:25, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Search "Social Democratic Party of Georgia" -Wikipedia -Llc in Google Books. -- Ե րևանցի talk  01:27, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I just did it again and got 15 results (see screenshot at right). I know there are discrepancies depending on place, time, user, &c. but the number in this case seemed a little large. —  AjaxSmack   01:27, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I actually get only 7 results with that search (and 40 for the current title). I too am baffled where the 1,200+ number comes from.   @AjaxSmack:   I have deleted that screenshot. It made an illustrative point, which I'm confirming by finding even less results using the same search, but it is also a pretty blatant copyright violation, which in my view vastly outweighs its usefulness (and did not warrant its upload) to make that point. --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey User:Fuhghettaboutit, why are we whispering? Google says it's OK right here ("You don't need our permission when you want to use an unaltered screenshot of ... the search results page for instructional or illustrative purposes.") but as long as the issue has been addressed, I don't care. —  AjaxSmack   00:43, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * That non-free copyright license is useless here. This is too far afield of this discussion. Moving to your talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:13, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * No idea on why there is such a huge discrepancy (maybe location has something to do with this). You can try searching both in Google Search instead of Google Books (don't forget to add "-Wikipedia", so it doesn't count the results from Wikipedia). -- Ե րևանցի talk  17:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * This is something going on on Google's end. They're upgrading or spilled coffee on some thingamajig's hoozy whatsit. The results have completely changed since this morning – eight hours later I'm getting 1,160 results (versus 35 for the current title), searching from the same computer, same IP address assigned, same browser and same configurations. I can also confirm that the search is indeed identical, since this morning I used the search links provided above to initially check, and have done so now again.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:31, 16 January 2015 (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.