Talk:Rebadging/Archives/2017

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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The result of the move request was: Withdrawn by nominator. Jgera5 (talk) 16:56, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Rebadging → Badge engineering – Despite the discussion that the page should be moved, there was nothing tagged on the main page that suggests renaming the page as such, and it also doesn't appear that the proper channels were done. I'm not biased towards either name, but there didn't appear to be an adequate discussion before it was moved. I suggest moving it back to its original title until we get a reasonable discussion going over the name. Jgera5 (talk) 05:22, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. Is the objection to the previous discussion that 6 days was not long enough to wait for comments? I guess I could have waited 12, but I figured it was enough. If there is a consensus about the number of days that is considered necessary, it should be explained more prominently at WP:MOVE (like, "instruction number n+1: Do not move a page until the discussion has been open ≥N days"). I thought I did understand the proper channels for this, and that the previous discussion was the proper channel. I went to Wikipedia:Requested_moves#April_01.2C_2014 and clicked "discuss", which brought me back to here again. So I am entering my opposition to moving it back to the old name. — ¾-10 13:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Actually, six days isn't long enough. Wikipedia requires at least a seven day waiting period of discussion. Jgera5 (talk) 17:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

6 vs 7, meh, duly noted. — ¾-10 04:40, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. 29th would have been 7 days. There still was no oposition ot the move voiced until the 1st which was about 10 days. I cannot see any reason not to discuss the change here if more discussion is needed. Djapa Owen (talk) 09:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to withdraw this for now, plus it's largely a consensus to keep it at its new title. Jgera5 (talk) 16:56, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rebadging. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081203184522/http://media.gm.com/eur/chevrolet/en/company/c_history/history.html to http://media.gm.com/eur/chevrolet/en/company/c_history/history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:36, 7 January 2016 (UTC)