Talk:Moldava (Teplice District)

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: no consensus. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:11, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Moldava (Teplice District) → Moldava
• Moldava → Moldava (disambiguation)

–

• Support per nom. - Altenmann >talk 16:23, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 03:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• When you search for this term at e.g. Google Books https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=moldava&pws=0 there doesn't seem to be any clear consensus what it means, and it certainly doesn't show a majority of references to a single place. I think we need a more coherent argument as to how this move would contribute to an actual improvement for the navigation of the average English reader. (Oppose.) --Joy (talk) 16:01, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It should also be noted that in July '23, https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Moldava showed a total of 250 incoming views, and there were 93 identified outgoing clickstreams to Moldova, 20 to the proposed primary topic, and 12 to Moldavia. This is overall a small amount of traffic, and very small towards the proposed primary topic. This not a pattern indicative of an actual primary topic by usage per

  WP:PTOPIC. --Joy (talk) 16:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  According to that link, 0.06% of users made a typo when looking for Moldova. Among the searched English-written books, two authors made that mistake too. But that does not make it an alternative name of Moldova. The word "Moldava" does not appear anywhere on the Moldova page, and on the current Moldava page it is only in the See also section. So I totally disagree with this country being a competitor regarding the use of the name.

  A hatnote, which would refer to the country as well as to the disambiguation page, would not reduce the comfort when searching for this country, but would at the same time bring improvement when searching for a Czech municipality and a more reasonable page name. FromCzech (talk) 19:17, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The fact that it's 0.06% of Moldova's views for the month doesn't change the fact that ~37% of the views of Moldava went there, and they generally *didn't* go to where you want to short-circuit. We have no proof to indicate that a hatnote would not reduce the comfort of more readers compared to those it would help. Regardless, this is not just an issue of exact match vs fuzzy match, there's also the other Moldava, that does appear in Books search results prominently.

  WP:PTM specifically addresses the issue of the other place being legitimately called Moldava. The place you want to short-circuit to is 200 people, the other one is 10,000 people. Neither article stands out in quality over the other. Again, the rationale to make the move needs to be stronger than this. --Joy (talk) 07:16, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  A typo for a frequently searched term is not a justification for a disambiguation page, a hatnote is simply enough. According to the WikiNav you sent, no one goes to Moldava nad Bodvou via the disambiguation page. In English books where Moldava nad Bodvou appears, it always appears in its full name. Moldava and Moldava nad Bodvou are two different names. When comparing article names, it doesn't matter how good they are or how much traffic they get, as long as their names are unique. FromCzech (talk) 13:24, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  There was recently a case where it was actually thought to be a justification for a primary redirect, in fact -

  Courtney Cox. Also, it's not true nobody goes there, what we know is that it was possible to identify 20 clickstreams to one of the destinations, and it was not possible to identify 10 to the other, yet we don't know if it's 9, for example. This still wouldn't be much, but there's likewise no clear reason to cater to 20 clickstreams as opposed to the other 230 views. --Joy (talk) 18:17, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Oppose The country of Moldova is also known as "Moldava", and should be an entry in the heart of the disambiguation page, instead of just the see also. Some sources use this spelling of the country, others use Moldavia, and others Moldovia, and then there's the official spelling Moldova, that is used more. -- 67.70.25.175 (talk) 06:45, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Nothing like that on the Moldova page. Moldava is maybe an exonym in some languages, but not in English. FromCzech (talk) 07:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Czech Republic has been notified of this discussion. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per 67.70.25.175 and per comments by Joy. No indication that, among the two entries listed upon the
  WP:ONEOTHER. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]