Talk:Entropy: Zero 2

(Redirected from Talk:Entropy : Zero 2)
Latest comment: 28 days ago by A412 in topic Requested move 13 April 2024

Requested move 13 April 2024 edit

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved. ~ A412 talk! 17:54, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply


Entropy : Zero 2Entropy: Zero 2 – Contested WP:COMMONNAME move. The game is universally referred to as Entropy: Zero 2 (without the stylized spacing) by RS, and by this article's own sourcing: PC Gamer, PCGamesN, TheGamer, GameRant, NME. Per WP:OFFICIALNAME, we should use the name sources use to refer to the game, not a "correct" or "official" name. ~ A412 talk! 16:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@IDKFA-93: courtesy ping ~ A412 talk! 16:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the ping and for the links to the article title policies (this is my first time actually creating an article from scratch and I wasn't entirely aware of them, apologies if my actions seemed disruptive).
After taking a look through the bullet points, I'm no longer entirely opposed to re-moving the article to "Entropy: Zero 2"; but if this happens, do you think it would be best to revise the contents of the article to use the "Entropy: Zero 2" name, or should the stylized ones be used instead? IDKFA-93 (talk) 17:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
The typical style is to use the "common name" throughout while acknowledging the stylized name: for example Insane 2: Insane 2 (stylized as In2ane) or Nier: Automata: Nier: Automata (stylized as NieR:Automata). ~ A412 talk! 17:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
That's what I thought; I've gone ahead and made the appropriate adjustments and moved the article. Apologies again if my previous actions seemed disruptive and unneeded. IDKFA-93 (talk) 17:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
No, I don't think your actions were disruptive, I think this is a perfect example of of the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. ~ A412 talk! 17:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.