This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
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 articles
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
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.
Oppose - only because the article would not fit into History of the Royal Canadian Navy under the Second World War heading and not be of similar title as the corresponding First World War list. You change one, you got to change em all. Llammakey (talk) 00:05, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not see how the proposed change improves anything. Our readers are not too stupid to cope with variations in the English language, and the imposition of one form for the sake of "consistency" adds nothing to usability, while grating on those who respect and value such differences. DuncanHill (talk) 01:10, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Llammakey - nothing to be gained from changing a whole series of article titles. Plus, "Second World War" cannot be reasonably considered a "significantly different title" from "World War II". 79.65.126.84 (talk) 14:16, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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.