Talk:Honeymoon Bridge (New Hampshire)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: New Hampshire Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	New Hampshire portal This article is supported by WikiProject New Hampshire (assessed as Low-importance).

"Honeymoon Bridge"

The usage of "Honeymoon Bridge" is under discussion, see Talk:Honeymoon Bridge (Ontario) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:59, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 December 2014

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: move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 06:33, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Honeymoon Bridge (Jackson) → Honeymoon Bridge (New Hampshire) – the other bridge is called Honeymoon Bridge (Ontario), and Jackson is not about Jackson, NH, whose article is located at Jackson, New Hampshire, and not the primary topic of "Jackson", so is a poor disambiguator, as it does not match the name Wikipedia's article on Jackson NH. I would say the most likely "Jackson" with a bridge would be Jackson, Mississippi, so I think the disambiguator is rather poor. Therefore, like the Ontario bridge article, this one should use a primary subnational division as its disambiguator. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 06:02, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Support. "[state name]" is the standard first way of disambiguating for this type of article. There's no need to specify the town, because as far as I know there is no other Honeymoon Bridge in New Hampshire. --Ken Gallager (talk) 22:16, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have no idea why this was moved to just Jackson, there are plenty of notable places in the world with that name. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:24, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Comment: After briefly checking to see how other articles in Category:Covered bridges in New Hampshire did it, this seems to be in line with other bridges with parenthetical disambiguators in their article title, such as Blair Bridge (New Hampshire) and Columbia Bridge (New Hampshire). The only other thing that might be worth considering would be a compromise between the current title and the proposed one, which uses both the town name and the state name, just as Cold River Bridge (Langdon, New Hampshire) and County Farm Bridge (Dover, New Hampshire) do. Cooljeanius (talk) (contribs) 19:01, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.