Talk:Civilization: A New Dawn/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Civilization: A New Dawn. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Move failure
I tried to move this page to instead be called Civilization (2017 board game). Overall discussion at Talk:Civilization_(disambiguation)#board_game_disambiguation.
I got the following error:
A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. [W8re3wpAIDEAAKBBi3IAAAAP] 2018-10-20 07:53:20: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError"
Holding off. Someone more expert than me complete this, please. CapnZapp (talk) 07:56, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Please help me with... moving this page (and its associated article) per above. Thank you
CapnZapp (talk) 08:50, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Doing... Sam Sailor 09:02, 22 October 2018 (UTC)- @CapnZapp:
Done. Sam Sailor 09:05, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
- I apologize for the unhelpful edit. I clicked "undo" because it appeared that it would undo the page-move, but it did not. Reposting my comment from the civ disambig talk page: "Civilization: A New Dawn" should remain the name of the page, as it is clearly the game's title. Disambiguation is only required when games/books/ or whatever article would have the same (or too-similar) title. I attempted to reverse the move, but was unable to do it, then saw the discussion here. It should be moved back.
As my edit summary stated, the civ disambiguation page can be clarified easily without affecting the title of this page. Civ 2010 only includes a disambig in parentheses because Civilization is the entire title, which makes it impossible to distinguish from others in the series.--MattMauler (talk) 12:06, 22 October 2018 (UTC)- No problem, MattMauler, and I apologize if I moved it prematurely. I've had a look at WP:NCGAMES and the article history for all four games. The current article titles with "year DAB" for the first three games look logical to me. I can fully understand that Civilization (2017 board game) fits snugly into that naming pattern, but then again, it has a distinct title that is not ambiguous. I think Matt has a good point here. What do you think, CapnZapp? Sam Sailor 12:46, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Sam Sailor; CapnZapp: I am open to discussion, definitely. If there's no response or continued discussion here, however, I believe the article should be moved back to its original title.
I understand the logic behind the current title--I just disagree: The title of the game requires no disambiguation as the earlier versions do, which are only titled Civilization or Civilization: The Board Game. There is no other version of the game (computer, board, or otherwise) titled Civilization: A New Dawn, and in situations like this, I think the WP guidelines are pretty clear. The recent move happened without consensus, and it goes against WP's naming conventions for unambiguous titles and against the recommendations of WP:NCGAMES/WP:NCVGDAB, which discusses the use of subtitles rather than parenthetical disambiguations right in the lead.--MattMauler (talk) 02:06, 24 October 2018 (UTC)- @MattMauler; CapnZapp: I have moved it back to Civilization: A New Dawn. This does not preclude a formal RM discussion with broader input, if need be. Sam Sailor 08:57, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- User:Sam Sailor: Not sure what to say here. I'm sure you don't intend to appear unhelpful, yet you have closed my help request as done and still the move is not done. Or rather, it is undone with a ridiculously small window for discussion, so maybe you just changed your mind and decided to leave the move up to somebody else? Furthermore, why would you mention formal RM discussions? As far as I can see, there is no disagreement here. I'm happy to have a discussion with arguments and stuff, only name your place and time. (I am not available every 24-hour period.) CapnZapp (talk) 11:53, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- @MattMauler; CapnZapp: I have moved it back to Civilization: A New Dawn. This does not preclude a formal RM discussion with broader input, if need be. Sam Sailor 08:57, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Sam Sailor; CapnZapp: I am open to discussion, definitely. If there's no response or continued discussion here, however, I believe the article should be moved back to its original title.
- No problem, MattMauler, and I apologize if I moved it prematurely. I've had a look at WP:NCGAMES and the article history for all four games. The current article titles with "year DAB" for the first three games look logical to me. I can fully understand that Civilization (2017 board game) fits snugly into that naming pattern, but then again, it has a distinct title that is not ambiguous. I think Matt has a good point here. What do you think, CapnZapp? Sam Sailor 12:46, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
- I apologize for the unhelpful edit. I clicked "undo" because it appeared that it would undo the page-move, but it did not. Reposting my comment from the civ disambig talk page: "Civilization: A New Dawn" should remain the name of the page, as it is clearly the game's title. Disambiguation is only required when games/books/ or whatever article would have the same (or too-similar) title. I attempted to reverse the move, but was unable to do it, then saw the discussion here. It should be moved back.
If you had filed at RM/TR, which is the place to request these moves, not via the {{help-me}} template, other editors would have had the opportunity to chime in and contest your request. Now, I swapped the titles around in all good faith, to which MattMauler had objections, and to which I myself by a closer look also doubt was the right thing to do. Ergo, your request was undiscussed and has been reverted. This is SOP at RM/TR. Next step for you is to follow WP:RM#CM. Sam Sailor 12:04, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- Ah - you misunderstood my plea for help. I never intended to "request" a move. I attempted to do a move in good faith that I believed was uncontroversial. The help template was because I encountered technical errors, and did not immediately know where to turn with that. Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 12:22, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- Now that I know there are varied opinions I have instead continued the discussions, here: Talk:Civilization_(disambiguation)#board_game_disambiguation. Again thanks CapnZapp (talk) 12:22, 24 October 2018 (UTC)