Talk:Oriya

Comments

Shouldn't this article be merged with Oriya language? They seem to be about the same thing. /Nicke L 20:35, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested move

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Withdrawn JHJ has split the disambiguation in twain, rendering this discussion moot. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 05:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{Requested move/dated|Odia}}

Oriya → Odia – all of the entries are "Odia" per talk:Oriya language#Requested move and Odia redirects here. Since only some of the entries are "Oriya", while all of them can be called "Odia", the disambiguation page should be renamed or split into two. 65.92.180.137 (talk) 23:47, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Oppose. Create a new dab page for "Odia" instead. "Oriya" is spelt quite differently and the two terms do not neatly overlap. Also note that the final names of some of these articles is still under discussion at Talk:Oriya language. — AjaxSmack 02:48, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

I've performed the split and removed the partial title matches. They might still be remerged, and if so I can see the proposer's point about using the superset name "Odia" (since it includes all of the Oriya entries plus the name-holders). Or the name-holder list could be split from the dab(s). -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:40, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.