Talk:Nafta

Untitled

NAFTA rules! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.128.242.205 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 February 2016

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 Nafta (disambiguation) to Nafta. wbm1058 (talk) 19:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nafta (disambiguation) → Nafta
Nafta → NAFTA

– While the acronym "NAFTA" clearly is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the North American Free Trade Agreement, I don't see the trade agreement being regularly abbreviated as "Nafta" (mixed-case). As the other meanings of "Nafta", including a Tunisian town, a defunct company, and the widespread alternative spelling of Naphtha, don't seem to constitute a primary topic either, the disambiguation page should take the place. --PanchoS (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there is no need to move the page located at Nafta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) as the page at NAFTA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) already is a redirect with the same target. This should not be a multimove request, instead it should be a regular move request. -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 00:22, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose "NAFTA" Oppose moving "nafta" overtop of "NAFTA" that is unnecessary, needless, and wrong. The edit history at NAFTA is much older than at "Nafta" -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 00:25, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the question is not as framed above, but "Is North American Free Trade Agreement the primary topic for "Nafta" in mixed case? If so, then the status quo is correct; if not, then move the dab page to Nafta. PamD 09:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support since the trade agreement is always all caps. Dicklyon (talk) 01:17, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Why would you move the redirect at "nafta" at all? (instead of just overwriting it without moving it) -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 06:09, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support, few readers will look up the trade agreement by typing in "nafta" because it's common knowledge that it's an acronym, so disambiguating these queries isn't detrimental. The second part of the move request is moot because that's a separate issue (whether the trade agreement should be at the spelled out name or at the acronym). --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:54, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Dicklyon, NAFTA as common style. Randy Kryn 3:23, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Comment – this request is simply to reverse the May 2006 move of Nafta to Nafta (disambiguation). Regarding Nafta → NAFTA, those are both redirects, and we don't move redirects... we just (those with admin privileges) move over the top of them. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:42, 27 February 2016 (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.