Talk:Mooloolaba

: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 as proposed. SSTflyer 09:51, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

----

:Mooloolaba, Queensland → {{no redirect|Mooloolaba}} – There is no other Mooloolaba, so to have the article at Mooloolaba, Queensland, is not necessary. The original move rationale was for consistency of naming, and I assume that means with other locations in Queensland, but that is not a valid reason. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)--Relisting. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:53, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose per apparent naming convention, as well as WP:CRITERIA consistency and precision and recognizability. Dicklyon (talk) 20:59, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose. Consistency is a perfectly valid reason: per policy, being consistent with the pattern used by similar titles is one of the characteristics of a good article title. ╠╣uw [talk] 19:18, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support per WP:NCAUST. Clear primary topic and Australian localities do not need to have the state tacked on. Jenks24 (talk) 09:16, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support – already a redirect here. WP:PRIMARY comes into play. ✉cookiemonster✉ ^𝚨755𝛀 19:53, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support per Jenks24, compounded by the fact that Mooloolaba is already a redirect. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:51, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support - As "Mooloolaba" unambiguously refers to a city within the Australian state of Queensland, there is no need to disambiguate the title.—Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 04:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support, per WP:CONCISE; adding the state is unnecessary over-disambiguation. WP:NCAUST covers this already. If it's a unique name like Mooloolaba, or a globally-recognised one like Sydney, no DAB is needed. If it's a feature within a city and needs disambiguation, DAB it with the city name (as in The Rocks, Sydney, though this should probably be changed to "The Rocks (Sydney)" to match how we'd do this for things within London or the city of New York). Otherwise, disambig by state; this is consistent with our treatment of placenames in US states, Canadian provinces, British subnational units, etc., etc. In the case of Looloolaba, the bare placename is a sufficient title, per WP:RECOGNIZABLE, WP:PRECISE, WP:COMMONNAME, WP:PRIMARY (more like "WP:ONLY"), and WP:CONCISE. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  04:26, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support per WP:NCAUST, as this town appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Mooloolaba". Dohn joe (talk) 16:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support per WP:NCAUST, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, etc. If this is the only place by this name, there no need for the natural geographic disambiguator.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:11, 27 July 2016 (UTC)