Talk:Endless Forms Most Beautiful (book)

Endless Forms Most Beautiful (book) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: September 15, 2017. (Reviewed version).

Requested move 03 January 2015

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: not moved. (

-- Calidum 07:52, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

– No need to disambig if the other article is also disambiguated. A simple _UNIQc45162a56c0fbe42-nowiki-00000048-QINU_ at the original page can handle it. – Victão Lopes ^Fala! 21:34, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:38, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is a need to disambiguate, depending on if there is or isn't a
WP:TWODABS. But the question I've posed needs to be answered first.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose evidently ambiguous. See
WP:TWODABS In ictu oculi (talk) 00:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose. No primary topic, but only barely. And no reason to make a change for the sake of a change. O N R (talk) 20:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, given that the ambiguous title is currently a disambiguation page, and due to currently not seeing an obvious
primary topic listed on that page. Steel1943 (talk) 19:42, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment: Also, I'd like to point out that the nominator originally had this move request malformed (the move from the current title to the ambiguous title was there, but not the move of the disambiguation page from the base title to the title with the "(disambiguation)" disambiguator.) Also, the nominator was the editor who created the disambiguation page... Steel1943 (talk) 20:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, given that the disambiguation page was created after this move discussion was filed, I wonder if the nominator meant to withdraw this nomination... Steel1943 (talk) 20:32, 9 January 2015 (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.