Talk:Rustamid succession crisis

Military history: National / African / Middle East / Medieval / Early Muslim

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	African military history task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)
	Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600)

On 6 December 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Rustamid Crisis (873-874) to Rustamid succession crisis. The result of the discussion was moved.

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Nice work

North8000 (talk) 22:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 December 2024

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: moved. Moved to Rustamid succession crisis per consensus for the alternate title. (non-admin closure) cyberdog958^Talk 14:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google Advanced Search only finds four web pages with the phrase "Rustamid Crisis" (uppercase or lowercase), and all of them are from Wikipedia, so this seems to be a descriptive title, not a proper name supported by sources. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 08:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Support unless someone finds something better, e.g. Rustamid succession crisis. Dicklyon (talk) 16:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That suggestion seems good. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral on lowercasing and support removing the date range. Plus an added Comment, remember that this is a local RM and not a reason to move any other 'Crisis' pages which would be controversial with a capital C (although there likely aren't many uppercased). Seems an obscure enough page to test the theory as an aside. There was a good RM at Cuban Missile Crisis many moons ago which correctly uppercased the event's name. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. But on the Cuban missile crisis, I think it was the previous (first) RM discussion that had it right. It's still barely up to 60% capped in sources, in spite of the extrapolated trend that was relied on last time around. Dicklyon (talk) 17:21, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Lowercase since we have no
WP:PRECISE enough. Maybe the Rustamids also had a water crisis and a plague crisis and whatever. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 20:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Support Per SMcC. Clearly a
WP:OVERPRECISION, the dates are unnecessary. I don't strenously object to "Rustamid succession crisis" either. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Support No-brainer. Tony (talk) 04:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC). And I like the proposal for "Rustamid succession crisis". Tony (talk) 07:14, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. If it is a descriptive title, then Rustamid crisis of 873–874 is the way to go (or perhaps "Rustamid succession crisis"). We cannot decide, when titles are of our own invention, that this was the Rustamid crisis. Srnec (talk) 21:05, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment:

Rustamid crisis ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 08:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Rustamid succession crisis is more clear. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rustamid succession crisis gets my vote, too. Dicklyon (talk) 05:47, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn, SMcCandlish, Cinderella157, and Tony1: help us choose between two options. Dicklyon (talk) 05:50, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning Rustamid succession crisis. Cinderella157 (talk) 05:59, 15 December 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.