Talk:Weak two bid
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was Moved WhiteNight T | @ | C 04:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
The reasons for move copied from the entry on the WP:RM page:
- Thanks for the article; however,
- I'd like to turn everyone's attention to WP:NC#Lowercase second and subsequent words; IOW, the article titles should be all-lowercased except when uppercase is clearly indicated.
- This is far better known as "weak two bid" or simply "weak two". It doesn't quite fit into the definition of convention (bridge), too -- this is a pretty natural treatment.
- Link to weak two bid (now a redirect) is already in several articles.
Thus, I suggest moving this article to "Weak two bid". Duja 12:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Voting
- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
- Support as the proposer. Duja 12:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Either. As the creator of this article, either is fine with me. (Although IMHO, I'd say it is a convention. But it's also a bid, so that's neither here nor there.) – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 17:30, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
- Add any additional comments
- I've seen it capitalized as both "Weak Two" and "Weak two" in books on the subject, as well as "Weak-two", "weak-2", etc. I've made lots of redirects. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 17:30, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Me too, but we should establish a consistent capitalization accross the wiki (and "bridge-wiki"). Since there is already WP:NC, I think we should follow it – there's no particular reason why "Two" should be uppercased. While most titles in English grammar are uppercased indeed, that approach is not practical on wikipedia for navigation and other issues. Duja 08:37, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.
This is confusing. There seems to be a new move request as of May 20, 2006, well after this poll closed. Errabee 00:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Voting
- Oppose. The Two club bid article, while very badly named, is about a very strong opening bid, in fact the strongest possible opening bid. Errabee 00:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)