Talk:Parana

Requested move 16 November 2024

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Paraná → Paraná (disambiguation)
Paraná (state) → Paraná

– There are precedents that would demonstrate then when the most popular/well known article also has other articles with the same or similar name, the disambiguation is X (disambiguation) and the popular article stays as its name. See Calgary and Calgary (disambiguation), Edmonton and Edmonton (disambiguation), Oaxaca and Oaxaca (disambiguation) Qwexcxewq (talk) 00:40, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note - Paraná (state) → Paraná was originally opened as a separate move request with an identical rationale. As the two discussions are dependent on each other, I've merged them together and converted the other discussion to a move notice. estar8806 (talk) ★ 02:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment No opinion on the primary topic grab, but I'll note that the dabpage should be at Parana, since it covers topics named "Paraná" and "Paranã". 162 etc. (talk) 17:11, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move Paraná → Parana (disambiguation) or Parana. Oppose 2nd. Insufficient disambiguation with Paranã.Theparties (talk) 00:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, no PRIMARY.--Ortizesp (talk) 05:37, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I understand the argument in the proposal - why are the examples of Calgary, Edmonton and Oaxaca similar to this, exactly? Per WP:DPT, if we just look at WikiNav for Parana, it's clear that the reader interest is not in a single topic. If a primary topic is to be decided on, we should also discuss long-term significance, and I'm not sure how we could claim that for state given the river, etc. (Oppose) --Joy (talk) 14:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
JFTR page views for the most popular topics indicate a slowly growing trend for the state, but generally the readership there does not exceed the readership of other topics. What we can do is try to apply MOS:DABCOMMON. --Joy (talk) 09:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]