 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Move discussion in progress
editThere is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Huasco (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 15:16, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Requested move
edit- 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: moved; consensus here is this is the primary topic and no disambiguation is needed. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 04:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Huasco, Chile → Huasco – Relisted. Jafeluv (talk) 09:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Relisted. --rgpk (comment) 20:48, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Move per current praxis in naming Chilean localites. The Huasco province and river are never or rarely refered as "Huasco" solely but are refered as "río Huasco" and "Provincia de Huasco". Huasco alone referes to the city. --Dentren | Talk 19:38, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Weak oppose absent a sub-guideline for Chile, such as exists for places in the United States, I see no reason why in general ", Chile" should be added to Chilean place names; however, in this case there is a Huasco, Peru, as well as a Huasco, Mexico (also called Huasca de Ocampo). These other Huascos may not be as famous, I don't know, but generally we should keep the disambiguation. --Bejnar (talk) 04:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: Is this the Huasco, Peru described at [1] and [2]? And regardless, is it worth starting a stub on it? The CIA site gives no population figures. The WOLPY street map shows no streets, or at least none at this location, there are streets shown in surrounding areas, and the associated satellite view shows no buildings although the CIA site lists it as a populated place. No vote as yet. Andrewa (talk) 14:29, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- It's rather a little hamlet. Diego Grez (talk) 04:44, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: Is this the Huasco, Peru described at [1] and [2]? And regardless, is it worth starting a stub on it? The CIA site gives no population figures. The WOLPY street map shows no streets, or at least none at this location, there are streets shown in surrounding areas, and the associated satellite view shows no buildings although the CIA site lists it as a populated place. No vote as yet. Andrewa (talk) 14:29, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support per nom. The Chilean city is the primary topic. — AjaxSmack 01:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: This should really be listed as a multiple move with a heads-up to Talk:Huasco, as presumably the DAB will move too. Note also that a similar RM on that page last year (with a heads-up here, see above) was closed messily but with no obvious consensus. Andrewa (talk) 07:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
- Listed as a multimove, and relisted one more time in case someone's watching the dab page. Jafeluv (talk) 09:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Support, primary topic, and the current "disambiguated" title is doing a poor job anyway, since the other Huascos we have articles on are also in Chile.--Kotniski (talk) 09:28, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support The town/hamlet/commune of Huasco is clearly more important than the river and the province; per nom. Diego Grez (talk) 04:44, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Support, primary topic and for consistency with other articles. Not to mention that Huasco Province is also in Chile... so for precision also. Rennell435 (talk) 13:54, 23 May 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.