Talk:The Thin Red Line

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Thin Red Line (1854 battle) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 13:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Remove image and substantive content
This change I was in favour of, and should be restored. I'll put it back if there is no further discussion. + m t  02:45, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Restored. + m t  00:45, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The rational for minimal content is that this article is a disambiguation page. The content in this page is appropriate in articles elsewhere, linked from this page. + m t  19:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


 * What consensus is the "disambiguation page" claim based on? --87.249.145.69 (talk) 20:00, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * There was no consensus after 10 days, so I made the bold decision to put it back to the style for disambiguation pages. Two others were in favor of cleaning up this page. If you have a point to make regarding why it should differ from the disambiguation manual of style, then please discuss it here. + m t  21:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * My chief point as why it should differ from disambiguation manual of style is that the article is about the figure of speech The Thin Red Line, its origin and influence in English usage, and definitely is not a disambiguation page. Essentially the rationale for difference from MOS:DAB is the same as with the difference from MOS:DAB in Going postal or The Constitution is not a suicide pact or Line in the sand. 87.249.145.69 (talk) 19:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, so this article should be about the figure of speech, and not a disambiguation page. Like Going postal versus Going postal (disambiguation). If there's no objection, I'll split off the DAB content to The Thin Red Line (disambiguation). I think this is what you are after. + m t  11:38, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm splitting this article into an English phrase (figure of speech) page and a disambiguation page. Hopefully everyone will be happy with it. + m t  00:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I am, for myself, perfectly comfotable with that - but - there should be, in my opinion, retained links to the most important other related uses - (the battle, the 1962 Guadalcanal novel and the 1998 movie), in kind, on the page The Thin Red Line itself. --87.249.145.69 (talk) 22:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

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: no consensus to move. Andrewa (talk) 08:41, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

The Thin Red Line → The Thin Red Line (disambiguation) — Move this article to a disambiguation page so that "The Thin Red Line" can be an article for the English phrase (figure of speech). + m t  23:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


 * er, is this a split request? 65.95.15.144 (talk) 23:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment if this is a split request, just copy off the disambiguation content to the other name, since you want to have the attribution history here, with the article on the phrase. 65.95.15.144 (talk) 23:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Re: Copying would be easiest, but I'd rather keep this history for the disambiguation page. (And I cannot move the article to The Thin Red Line (disambiguation).) The English phrase content is newer, but is more appropriate as a new article at The Thin Red Line derived from the split content. + m t  00:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 'Reply' perhaps it would be better if you started the article at The Thin Red Line (phrase), then and requested a swap of articles instead? That way we could see what you want to shape the article up as. 65.95.15.144 (talk) 05:10, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Re: Good idea. + m t  05:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose no evidence that the phrase meets the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC guidelines. The Thin Red Line (phrase) should be merged to The Thin Red Line (1854 battle) the original event to which it refers . Tassedethe (talk) 20:41, 5 March 2011 (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.