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: moved. No super compelling reason has been given to override the uppercased "Western" naming convention common on similar articles. The last multi-move did not attract much participation. I suggest that if someone opens another multi-move that it should be hosted on Talk:Spaghetti Western where it may attract more eyeballs. There is consensus to lowercase "Spaghetti". (closed by non-admin page mover) Schierbecker (talk) 05:46, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of Spaghetti Western films → List of spaghetti Westerns – In the discussion regarding upper/lowercasing "Western" in the Western genre and subgenres, it was noted that there are instances of "spaghetti Western" across Wikipedia that inappropriately uppercase "Spaghetti". Per MOS:GENRECAPS, "spaghetti" is not a proper noun and should not be capped. It is no different than "contemporary Western", "neo-Western", "science fiction Western", and other subgenres that do not begin with a proper noun. I am opening this as a controversial move discussion rather than requesting a technical move as there are editors who have noted that "Spaghetti" is longstanding consensus (a suggestion I disagree with based on GENRECAPS). With that in mind, if consensus is to move, it will require a technical move request to preserve edit history as there is a redirect in place at the suggested location. ButlerBlog (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 04:01, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Oppose – The mixed-case proposed "spaghetti Western" (or its plural) is much less common in sources than either Spaghetti Western or spaghetti western. The lowercase one is more common, and more consistent with WP style guidance at MOS:CAPS, in spite of the lack of consensus to always decapitalize western in genres. This is in stark contrast to contemporary Western. Dicklyon (talk) 19:59, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Dicklyon, who knows his spaghetti (and westerns). Randy Kryn (talk) 12:18, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  FTR, I like to think I know my Westerns as well (considering the number of sources I have actually read on the subject to cite hundreds of articles) ;-) ButlerBlog (talk) 13:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No disrespect Butlerblog, and after much thought I've struck the controversial comment as I'm not really sure if Dicklyon knows his westerns or not (films, books, boots on the ground, etc.). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:12, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We're good - I didn't take it as disrespect, nor uncivil. But thanks for the strike, just the same. ButlerBlog (talk) 15:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And you're right, you know a lot more about westerns that I do. I perhaps know more about Wikipedia capitalization style though. Dicklyon (talk) 03:36, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That was unnecessary. I did not suggest that I know more than anyone - it was a lighthearted response to Randy, and I did not mention you nor what you do or don't know. ButlerBlog (talk) 18:55, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support alternative per MOS:CAPS and WP:NCCAPS and this ngram, neither the fully (the present title)) nor partially (the proposal) capitalised forms should be used but rather List of spaghetti westerns. Aside: contemporary western isn't a good comparative search since it is too likely to include references that are "contemporary occidental". However, contemporary westerns is much more specific to the cowboy genre. Contemporary Westerns is clearly overcapping (except at the start of sentences and where title case is expected) since there is no need to cap a common noun used attributively even if there is a misperception that if part of a noun phrase is capped, it should be capped in full. Regardless, this ngram shows that the capped forms are used about 75% of the time - less than a threshold of about 80% for ngram evidence, which over-reports capitalisation since it includes captions etc that use title case. See also MOS:GENRECAPS. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:22, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"about 75% of the time - less than a threshold of about 80% for ngram evidence" seems to be splitting some mighty close hairs. 75% seems more than enough to keep something uppercased, that's in common name recognition range. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:22, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: To clarify, within the scope of this discussion, whether "Westerns" is capitalized or not is an "all or none" issue (as previously discussed in the subgenre move discussion). There are many subgenres and there needs to be consistency of how they are presented, whatever that is determined to be (which as of right now is "no consensus", and I would argue that present long-standing consensus is to capitalize Westerns, whether traditional or a subgenre). This is only about "spaghetti". And my reasoning in presenting this was simply for consistency across subgenres because it is currently the only Western subgenre consisting of two words ("something" western) where we are capitalizing where the name of the subgenre is not a proper noun. Prior to Cinderella157's input, I was inclined to withdraw as I don't see this presently going anywhere and I'm fine leaving it status quo ante. I get that some people love ngrams, but as someone who spends a good deal of time in the Westerns project digging through sources for those articles, I see it differently. I will concede that on a practical level (i.e. actually searching for, looking at, and reading sources), I see a closer percentage relationship between all three possible combinations of S/spaghetti W/western than the other subgenres, but for most other subgenres, it is not as close a relationship. But my contention is that, given the close relationship between the three possibilities, I'm looking for consistency with the other subgenres. Considering Dicklyon's obsession with caps MOS and the outcome of the previous discussion, I was hoping for some level of meeting me halfway on this, but that's clearly never going to happen; and likewise, I'm equally as rigid on the necessity that there is no practical reason for "spaghetti western" without discussion of all subgenres as a whole for reasons already mentioned, and we've already just had that discussion (which you all already know). Since no one from the Westerns project (or anyone else) has weighed in on this one, if you're all fine with me withdrawing at this point, I'll withdraw the move request. Otherwise, we'll keep it open the full term and allow an uninvolved editor to close it as what clearly is going to be "opposed"/status quo/no move/whatever. ButlerBlog (talk) 15:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  If we want consistency, we'd lowercase western in all genres. Sources are pretty clear that a lot of them are usually lowercase. But it's not an all or none issue as you say. Dicklyon (talk) 03:45, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to List of spaghetti westerns per Cinderella. The ngram is fairly conclusive that the leading rendition is that no part of the term is capitalised, and per MOS:CAPS we should only capitalise if a substantial majority of sources do so. Indeed, the proposed form is down in third place so certainly no substantial majority there.  — Amakuru (talk) 06:32, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  For the reasons noted above, that's not the move suggestion, nor can it be part of this discussion. ButlerBlog (talk) 11:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not sure what you mean by "nor can it be part of this discussion". Per WP:RM#CM, I can "consider contributing to the open discussion if [I] would like to propose another alternative", and I'm doing just that. Seemingly Cinderella is of a similar mind and perhaps Dicklyon too, and given the clear evidence that the commonly used name favours spaghetti western over other alternatives, and also the fact that MOS:CAPS has a much higher bar for capitalising than even simple 50/50 usage, it seems like a no brainer that the move should go ahead. The parent article Spaghetti Western should also be moved in the same way.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I thought it was clear in my note above, but moving to "spaghetti western" creates a practical problem of consistency. There are a few dozen subgenres of Western, and some crossover genres. If you move this page to "spaghetti western" and carry forward with lowercasing it across the various articles, you're going to run into consistency issues when the same article discusses "revisionist Western"[1], "neo-Western"[2], or some other crossover (which does happen a lot when dealing with subgenres). This is why I said that the discussion of lowercasing "western" in the subgenres needs to be an all-or-none discussion, taken as a whole rather than as a part. Longstanding is that Western is capitalized, and we just wrapped up an overarching discussion of a number of the subgenres as a whole that was closed as no consensus (Talk:List of Western subgenres#Requested move 12 July 2023). This move came out of a suggestion within that discussion. There are three possible outcomes, but if the move to "spaghetti Western" is opposed, the better option in this case is to leave it status quo for the reason that I outlined above. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Referring to your note, the previous RM was no consensus. While the result is to retain the status quo, "no consensus" means just what it says - there was no consensus either way with respect to capitalising western. There is no long-standing consensus to be argued. One can make an argument here for WP:CONSISTENT. However, doing so is to argue consistency with a form of capitalisation for which there is no consensus. While consistency between articles is a "nice to have", ultimately, an article need only be consistent within itself - and this is not precluded by the capitalisation (or other variations in language) used in related articles that may be referred to in a particular article. As for your ngrams, it was resolved at the previous RM that the ngram part of speech function is not efficacious in these instances since the evidence is that it appears to treat attributive noun phrases as adjectives. Seaching for x westerns, however, is much more specific to the cowboy genre, and excludes references for Western, meaning occidental and similar. Here, revisionist westerns is only slightly less than revisionist Westerns and Revisionist Westerns is only a small percentage that may be attributed largely to use of title case. It should not be capitalised at all. Neo-westerns has only a small representation in the corpus, such that the results tend to represent individual book releases (see here) and the usage is quite mixed. Again, the results do not support capitalisation at all. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:09, 29 July 2023 (UTC) Correction: x westerns. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This is probably a better ngram. Dekimasuよ! 06:24, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Either way. Your ngram only goes to prove that wester/westerns in spaghetti western|s is not capped in a substantial majority of sources per MOS:CAPS and WP:NCCAPS. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to List of spaghetti westerns per above discussion (note that this is an additional !vote on top of my initial "Strong Oppose" of the original proposal). Dicklyon (talk) 17:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support While I'm not a huge fan of mixed capitalization, I'm concerned this might be a back door to changing "Western" to "western," in spite of literary and academic norms and the result of the original discussion. For me, literary and academic norms are more important than our arbitrary MoS stuff. And the weakness of things like ngrams is they only look at the internet and are easily overwhelmed by random articles and frankly substandard sources. If it takes a lowercase 's' to retain the proper form of Western, I'm ok with it. Intothatdarkness 18:41, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Just to clarify, by the result of the original discussion, you're referring toTalk:List of Western subgenres#Requested move 12 July 2023, correct? ButlerBlog (talk) 19:01, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Correct. I should have made that clear. Intothatdarkness 20:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm concerned this might be a back door to changing "Western" to "western," in spite of literary and academic norms and the result of the original discussion - I would strongly agree with that assessment. And unfortunately, that appears to be what is being pushed by those that only take a cursory look at this discussion, without considering the whole along with the previous discussion. ButlerBlog (talk) 15:14, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I hate these discussions but feel that we should keep it at Spaghetti Westerns. Carptrash (talk) 21:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I would not be opposed to this option. I've seen it go both ways, honestly, at least when it comes to these particular movies. Intothatdarkness 00:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Lowercase "spaghetti": This is a genre (or subgenre), and per MOS:GENRECAPS, we don't cap genres. Whether or not we capitalize "western" can be argued as a reference to a particular place, but I don't see any good argument for capitalizing "spaghetti". Probably we shouldn't capitalize "western" either, per Amakuru, but definitely we shouldn't capitalize "spaghetti". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:42, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Correction/refinement included above. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • i.e. support. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:15, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Best to keep the status quo. I can't recall seeing "List of spaghetti Westerns", very often. GoodDay (talk) 23:46, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per my comments at the other discussion, but this looks like no consensus. That said, at least as importantly, oppose the alternative List of spaghetti westerns. Given that downcasing of "Westerns" was rejected in the broader move discussion at Talk:List of Western subgenres just a week ago, that suggestion would just eliminate the current consistency among related titles. Dekimasuよ! 06:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: MOS:GENRECAPS: "Names of genres (such as musical or literary) are not capitalized unless they contain a proper name." Seems simple to me. Western is debatable, but spaghetti is not. SchreiberBike | ⌨  20:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per MOS:GENRECAPS. Neither "spaghetti" nor (in this context) "western" are proper names. When "Western" is a proper name it refers to Western culture.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  14:43, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Sounds like you mean to support the alternative with both lowercased then. Dicklyon (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support List of spaghetti westerns per above reasoning. Capitalizing the W makes no sense. —В²C ☎ 22:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support List of spaghetti westerns per above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:55, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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: no consensus. Weighing in this RM, the previous one, and the multi-move discussion, I could not find a consensus for this change. While there is a slightly higher amount of support !votes, both sides presented strong arguments, which were not enough to overturn each other. As noted by Schierbecker in the closing comment of the previous discussion, there is currently no super compelling reason [...] to override the uppercased "Western" naming convention. Doing so would go against WP:CONSISTENT (a point which was mentioned by some !votes, both in support and opposition, but which holds more weight on the oppose side, as every other subgenre article capitalizes "Western"). (Closing comment added on 16:09, 25 September 2023 (UTC), after being suggested to in the move review.) (closed by non-admin page mover) – MaterialWorks 10:34, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of spaghetti Westerns → List of spaghetti westerns – “Western” is capitalized when used as an adjective in a proper noun. But in this context it is a common noun, not an adjective in a proper name, and so is not capitalized, as verified by common usage the NY Times: “lone hero of spaghetti westerns?”[3], “ hyperviolent films known as spaghetti westerns” [4], by The Guardian: “in the shape of the spaghetti western” [5], and by Google ngrams. В²C ☎ 06:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 02:09, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. This was the clear consensus in the move request above, I disagreed with the way that one was closes. It is also supported by MOS:CAPS and the evidence presented there.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:10, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Oppose - Such a move needs to be discussed in terms of all subgenres of Western, as was noted in the discussion we just had above. There is not clear consensus to lowercase "western", nor was there at Talk:List of Western subgenres#Requested move 12 July 2023. The nom is cherry-picking examples to support the move, but there are many WP:RS examples that uppercase as well (in fact, I listed more 17 academic sources in the multi-move discussion that support uppercase Western and are currently used throughout the Westerns WikiProject). When using ngrams, the entire basket of subgenres has to be considered and many of the ngrams listed in the aforementioned multi-move discussion strongly support capitalization. We need to look at the whole in order to be WP:CONSISTENT. When capitalized as a proper noun, it is because "Western" is derived from "the West", as the genre originally focused solely on the American West. I would suggest that this RM be withdrawn since we have just been through 2 exhaustive discussions of this and it would seem that now it's just going to be WP:BLUDGEONED until one side quits or gets tired of fighting it. If it's because you disagree with the closure above, take it up as WP:MRV. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I did not cherry pick. The NY Times and Google ngrams are my go-to reliable sources for English usage. I decided to include a British source too, and went for the most reliable British news source, The Guardian. I was not aware of the discussion at the multi-move which I now see included this article, but it conflated "western" in adjective and noun contexts. As to your 17 sources, that is cherry-picking, as demonstrated by the ngram chart I linked which is a comprehensive summary of all usage of what's relevant in this proposal: spaghetti western. But, in general, prominent news sources are a better source for reflecting current usage than books that go back decades, like many in your 17. In any case, at least two of us believe consensus was misread in the previous RM regarding the capitalization of "western" in this title. Let's verify. While overall consistency is the ultimate goal, often we get there by testing in small steps first. --В²C ☎ 15:11, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  If you believe consensus was "misread", then the appropriate step is WP:MRV, not another move discussion. If you weren't aware of the previous multi-move discussion (as you noted), then you did not fully read the above move discussion before posting this one, which is another reason you should withdraw and follow the correct steps. ButlerBlog (talk) 15:25, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I thought about a MRV. But this single letter capitalization in western was only one aspect of it. I decided focusing on just that one aspect in a new RM was the most efficient way to proceed. Now that I’ve reviewed the previous multi-move discussion, I see nothing there that affects this focused specific proposal in any significant way. —В²C ☎ 17:04, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I disagree, and it is evident that we could not be at more opposite ends of the spectrum on every single item you've noted. ButlerBlog (talk) 17:38, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. After reading both the most recent request before this and the broader move request, I see that in the former there was a strong desire for "spaghetti westerns" that was largely opposed with arguments along the lines of "that wasn't the question," while the latter was closed without consensus. My read is that the broader move discussion's lack of consensus is not reflective of how the community feels about this particular subgenre; that's not surprising, as capitalization in English does tend to be reduced over time. Moreover, appeals to emotion regarding capital letters shouldn't be given any weight. If the suggestion of "spaghetti western" hadn't been firmly rejected by a minority of editors in the prior discussion, perhaps this one wouldn't be necessary at all.~TPW 18:02, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose as yet another attempt to ignore actual outside practice and consensus to impose Wikipedia's arbitrary stylistic preferences, and appeals to impose those preferences "just because" shouldn't be given any weight. Google-scraped things aside, it is standard practice in both film and literary circles to capitalize Western when referring to that specific genre. The assertion "Western" somehow applies to the west writ large and not a specific literary (and film) genre is not accurate in this instance. Intothatdarkness 15:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  While WP has somewhat arbitrary stylistic preferences, this is not about that. I already cited The NY Times and Guardian in the proposal. Brittanica also lower-cases “spaghetti western”. That “spaghetti Western” (and not “spaghetti western” nor “Spaghetti Western”) is “standard practice in film and literary circles” has not been demonstrated. В²C ☎ 11:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia has clearly chosen not to use capitalization to convey the concept of a "specific literary (and film) genre", per MOS:GENRECAPS. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:41, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – as nom said, the consensus was already clear enough above. There's no reason WP should cap things that sources do not. Dicklyon (talk) 16:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  You should rephrase that to say "some sources do not." Others clearly do, and they are more reflective of the consensus in fields that actually study this kind of thing. But I also realize it's rather futile to fight against Wikipedia's desire to accept random web scrapings as opposed to actual scholarly RS. Intothatdarkness 20:24, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The previous close does seem questionable. One might make an argument for WP:CONSISTENT but it is a weak argument when there is no consensus for the consistency being imposed - as I stated above. And arguments like Best to keep the status quo. I can't recall seeing "List of spaghetti Westerns", very often. lack substance. Per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS we should only capitalise if a substantial majority of sources do so. This is essentially a statistical question that can only be answered by a statistically significant random sample. So, lists of books offered by editors are rarely going to be statistically significant or randomly selected, while ngram evidence satisfies both requirements. As I stated in the mass RM, spaghetti western has only one conceivable context - the Italian cowboy genre. Other searches on titles there (eg contemporary western) could easily be referring could return results for "Western" in the context of contemporary Western culture and like - being the opposite of Asian. When one searches on x westerns the context also becomes quite specific for the cowboy genre (as done above). The evidence referred to above is (viewed overall) not supporting Western (capped) when referring to the cowboy genre. Arguments like I don't like the MOS really don't carry any weight. The assertion "Western" somehow applies to the west writ large and not a specific literary (and film) genre is not accurate in this instance. This ngram tells us that we cap Western culture and a review of google books here tells us the context is overwhelmingly about occidental culture and not cowboy culture (please note that the corpus of ngams is a sub-set of google books). When capitalized as a proper noun, it is because "Western" is derived from "the West", as the genre originally focused solely on the American West. This is a circular argument without substantiation. If it were indeed a proper noun (as asserted), then we would see spaghetti Western, capped as such almost exclusively - but we don't. Cinderella157 (talk) 04:58, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for the third time. The previous discussions found no consensus to change the capitalized form that is already used consistently across titles pertaining to this genre, not no consensus to impose it. After an extended discussion did not find support for downcasing all of the titles together, repeatedly raising the issue at individual articles can appear to be a form of forum shopping or WP:REHASH; here, I almost missed the new discussion having assumed it was complete after having gone on for a month and a half. As previously, the standard is "consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources." Usage in high-quality sources was discussed at length in the move request at Talk:List of Western subgenres. Whether the sources involved are reliable ones is a judgment that is ideally performed by human editors with high media literacy, and is fundamentally at odds with the idea that we should determine capitalization based upon random samples of sources. (While I don't oppose the use of Google Ngrams itself, note that we cannot even see the underlying data there, so when we have better information as was cited in the previous discussion, it should not simply be discarded.) If any subsequent discussion on this topic is to be initiated, please ping me, and please consider sticking to considering all related page titles in one centralized discussion. Dekimasuよ! 05:19, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  As I pointed out in my initial comment, this particular RM should have been withdrawn and handled as WP:MRV. But as it wasn't, all participants in the previous two discussions should have been notified, given the immediacy of the follow-up. But by the nom's own admission, they did not fully research the state of previous discussion: "I was not aware of the discussion at the multi-move" - Odd - considering it was directly mentioned in the original RM on this page that they took the time to oppose, suggesting they didn't carefully read it - but OK, fine - neither were involved participants all aware of this follow-up RM, apparently. That's just one more reason this is inappropriate and should be closed. We don't get to just beat this horse until one side or the other gets tired of responding (or, as Dekimasu pointed out, until enough opposition is ignored). ButlerBlog (talk) 16:06, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. As noted above, sources don't consistently use caps in this two-word term. Regardless of what is done for other titles referencing the larger genre (although I would tend to favor lowercase for those as well), I don't see a good argument for the capital letter in the title of this particular article. See also the prior comments by Amakuru and myself in the previous RM discussion. I disagree that this should have been handled by an MRV. The previous RM was focused on the first word, 'spaghetti'. It concluded that "There is consensus to lowercase 'Spaghetti'." This RM is about the other word. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:25, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  There was already an RM on the other word as well, Talk:List of Western subgenres#Requested move 12 July 2023 which ended with "no consensus to move after extended time for discussion". Dekimasuよ! 02:30, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, but that RM was for a large group of 17 articles; it was not focused on this particular article. See, e.g., WP:TRAINWRECK. The presence of the extra word "spaghetti" that identifies this distinct subgenre makes this topic a bit different from the others. This is the only one of those 17 articles in which the name of a subgenre appears somewhere that is not at the beginning of the article title, so it is the only one that produces a glaring difference in capitalization of the two words in a subgenre name in the article title. Also, that RM had a "no consensus" result for the group, not a "consensus not to move" result. (But probably, the Spaghetti Western article should have been included in this RM, since that one involves the capitalization of the same subgenre identifier.) —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Neither capitalization is right or wrong (Merriam-Webster says western in this context is "often capitalized"), but for better or worse Wikipedia has made this decision a long time ago. "Western" is capitalized in all of its subgenres. Dan Bloch (talk) 17:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I would add that the multi-move discussion that lowercase supporters of this particular discussion have claimed to have been "no consensus" on both upper and lowercase ignores the fact that uppercase is long-standing consensus (FWIW, there were RMs some time ago for which there was established consensus to move titles from "western" to "Western", which I cannot seem to find it at the moment - it was some time around 2015ish). ButlerBlog (talk) 18:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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: Withdrawn. Agreed to give it a rest. (non-admin closure) —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of spaghetti Westerns → List of spaghetti westerns – The July RM close that resulted in the current title, matching the least common form in sources, was a bit bizarre as many have noted, and the August RM attempt to correct it did not achieve consensus. So we should try again. The guidelines at MOS:CAPS and WP:NCCAPS seem clear enough that we don't cap what's not almost always capped in sources. And the evidence from sources is clear that both spaghetti and western lowercase is the most common variant, so it's hard to see why we wouldn't go with that. Dicklyon (talk) 03:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dicklyon - As was noted in the MR, "No consensus" means "no consensus to move". You need to carefully go back through what was said in the closures AND the MR. We've had 3 RMs and a MR now in less than 4 months. Give it a rest; everyone is exhausted at this point. I'd ask you to pull this request as you're now bludgeoning this. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Butlerblog that this request should be withdrawn. This proposal exactly restates the one that failed to achieve consensus in a three-week long RM that closed barely a month ago, a closure that was endorsed at MRV. Sure, consensus can change, but give it some time before taking the temperature again. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 13:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, it seems customary to let these things lie for a while (6 months?) unless they closed with something like "consensus to move but no consensus on what to move to" necessitating another round for clarity.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, maybe March or so. I'm OK is someone knows how to properly close/withdraw this. Dicklyon (talk) 01:37, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]