Talk:Giga (United Nations)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations.

Article creation[edit]

Created a basic stub on a high-profile UN programme of work Bquast (talk) 13:16, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 November 2023[edit]

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 (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 21:06, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GIGA Connect → Giga (United Nations) – Per the website at https://giga.global/, the UN itself does not consistently use all-caps "GIGA", and the Giga initiative includes Giga Map, Giga Finance and Giga Connect. Some of the content of the article is already outside of the scope of Giga Connect, as in the places that refer to schools being "mapped" rather than "connected". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Not an acronym, typically not all-caps in sources. The larger scope looks right, too. Dicklyon (talk) 05:39, 2 December 2023 (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.

@BarrelProof: can you take care of cleaning up the article now that the title scope is different and the lead is still narrow? Dicklyon (talk) 02:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]