Talk:Goods/Archives/2017
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Goods. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Requested move 11 January 2017
- 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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) JudgeRM (talk to me) 03:11, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Good (economics) → Goods – Although technically there is a concept of a singular good, in the economic sense, it is virtually never heard of in the singular, it is almost always "goods", hence I think there's a good (no pun intended!) case for making this an exception to WP:NCPLURAL. Furthermore, the proposed title satisfies WP:NATURALDIS, whereas the current one, with its parentheses, does not. Goods is already a redirect here, so no disambiguation issues. — Amakuru (talk) 21:33, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose this move 2601:541:4305:C70:C56F:7146:87BE:282D (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- OK.... any particular reason? Votes without rationales are not normally counted as valid. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 23:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- Support. Absolutely no one uses this term in the singular. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:40, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
- Support per the thorough nom. This topic is virtually always referred to as "goods" plural, and this satisfies WP:NATURALDIS.--Cúchullain t/c 17:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- Support, agree with all other supporting comments. Pol098 (talk) 11:52, 18 January 2017 (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.