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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. See Talk:List_of_Historic_Sites_of_Japan_(Aichi)#Requested_move_21_March_2022 for the RM to move "Historical Sites" to "historical sites". (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 19:54, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of historic sites of Japan (Kōchi) → List of Historic Sites of Japan (Kōchi) – Capitalisation in line with all similar articles. Move over redirect. Colonies Chris (talk) 22:12, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 05:20, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, is "Historic Sites" some kind of special name instead of a noun? Dr. Vogel (talk) 22:37, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • To me it looks like sentance case applies, as per WP:LOWERCASE (but I'm not confident about that). Looking at Template:Historic_Sites_of_Japan perhaps consensus is to capitalise? -Kj cheetham (talk) 22:39, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, I'm thinking WP:LOWERCASE applies until proven otherwise, i.e. if it turns out to be a proper name, or if consensus says it should be capitalised. If Colonies Chris can please provide proof of any of those 2 things, I'll be happy to make the move. Otherwise happy for somebody else to process this one. Dr. Vogel (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oppose: Not a proper noun name; shouldn't be done. Contesting. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:59, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        Instead, move to List of historic sites of Kōchi or List of historic sites of Kōchi Prefecture (removing "Japan" as unnecessary). This is not a proper name. In fact, the article covers multiple different types of designations of historical importance, some of which are not at the national level. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(←) In the overview article Monuments of Japan, this capitalisation is used throughout the descriptions of these sites and similar categories such as Natural Monuments and Places of Scenic Beauty. They are official designations, not just descriptive titles. Colonies Chris (talk) 13:51, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. I see no evidence that WP:LOWERCASE doesn't apply here. I know Colonies Chris is citing consistency as a reason, but two wrongs don't make a right. If you put in a proposal to turn all of them into lower case I would support that instantly. Dr. Vogel (talk) 14:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • So then, rather than moving one article from "historic sites" to "Historic Sites", we would have to move forty-five articles vice versa? There are forty-six such articles in Category:Historic Sites of Japan. Would you rather make one page move or forty-five page moves? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:07, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • We can't let laziness beat correctness. And it's all about the sources. Dr. Vogel (talk) 14:31, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well then, I have made a huge move request at Talk:List of Historic Sites of Japan (Aichi)#Requested move 21 March 2022. That request involves 45 articles. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:20, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

        Yeah that's fine, it's just a few runs of the script, it's a 10-minute job. Better to have that than to have titles that are wrong, as long as there's consensus and the sources don't say otherwise. Dr. Vogel (talk) 16:38, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If these changes are to be made, what about all the similar articles such as those listed in {{Cultural Properties of Japan}}. Shouldn't they all be lowercased too? And that means extensive lowercasing changes should be made to the content of those articles too, and to associated categories. Colonies Chris (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose (and I supported the RM on the move in the opposite direction). No evidence in sources that these words are proper names, or treated as special in sources. Dicklyon (talk) 03:22, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not true. Not even remotely true, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:13, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose and support moving others the other way per my comments at Talk:List of Historic Sites of Japan (Aichi)#Requested move 21 March 2022. Appears to fall to WP:SIGCAPS and we don't cap. Cinderella157 (talk) 05:00, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "we dont' cap", World Heritage Site? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:13, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per MOS:SIGCAPS and WP:NCCAPS generally. This is not consistently capitalized in source material, so it should not be capitalized on Wikipedia. We've been over this plenty of times before with equivalent terms in other countries. Japanese doesn't have capitalization; any application of capital letters to transcriptions and translations is happening after the fact per the whim of whatever a particular publisher's house style is. We have our own, and it is to use lower-case for anything that is not overwhelingly found capitalized in sources.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:43, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is overwhelingly (?universally?) found capitalized in the sources I have seen (time to fix the policies?), Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:13, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Yes, of course, shouldn't have been moved in the first place (per sense and sources); apart from this drive-by action, the User who moved the page here in the first place doesn't seem to have contributed much either to this (or the other) Historic Site lists(s), or to all the individual Historic Site pages spawned herefrom, so they may not have known what this list of Historic Sites is about and thought this was just a random list of historic sites, I don't know (cf wider discussion on the Aichi page), Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:13, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]