Talk:Makerfield
Add topicLatest comment: 1 month ago by 1isall in topic Requested move 22 June 2026
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | On 22 June 2026, it was proposed that this article be moved from Makerfield to ?. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Requested move 22 June 2026
[edit]- 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. WP:SNOW consensus that the area meets PT2. (closed by non-admin page mover) 1isall (talk | contribs) 22:25, 28 June 2026 (UTC)
Makerfield → ? – Not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over the constituency per pageviews. However, if moved, I'm not sure what the new disambiguator should be. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 13:03, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:LTS. This is the area from which the constituency takes its name. The constituency is only 40 years old and could easily be abolished at the next boundary review. Zacwill (talk) 15:01, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. Zacwill says it all. Moscow Mule (talk) 00:04, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:DABCONCEPT. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per Zacwill's response. Suggest WP:SNOW close given rapid unanimous opposition. 10mmsocket (talk) 06:58, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per Zacwill. Pure WP:RECENTISM. Almost nobody outside it had heard of the constituency until recent events. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:33, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.