Talk:VV Sneek Wit Zwart

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

Requested move 14 July 2022[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. (closed by non-admin page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:41, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VV Sneek Wit Zwart → Sneek Wit Zwart – Per WP:CONCISE and WP:COMMONNAME.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] This move is about as basic as its gets but blocked by my own edits, so bringing to the group. gidonb (talk) 18:36, 14 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:29, 22 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 01:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Giant Snowman 14:18, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - it is standard to use the abbreviations, see e.g. AFC Ajax, Manchester United F.C. etc. Giant Snowman 14:21, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Snowman, the problem is not with abbreviations in general, as in your examples, but, in this particular case, how little these are used. Many clubs have additional abbreviations that can become part of the name that we would use only if additional name elements are needed for natural disambiguation or already have abbreviations in the name that are an essential part of the name. We even have fine names that are constructed only of abbreviations. For example, VV SHO or VV WNC, both created by me. There is NO general problem with abbreviations! The problem, in this particular case, is that the VV is excessive for clarity and also little used. WP:CONCISE and WP:COMMONNAME cover that. Just follow the references above and look at the forward and it will become very clear. Or look at other articles. It's all good! gidonb (talk) 21:09, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per GiantSnowman. The acronym is the convention, even with other Dutch teams such as VVV-Venlo, VV Katwijk, and VV Noordwijk. RedPatch (talk) 19:10, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some have VV as part of the name. Others don't. The conventions and official policies are WP:CONCISE, WP:COMMONNAME, and WP:NATURAL. NOT to exclude or include any particular parts of the long name! VVV-Venlo, VV Katwijk, and VV Noordwijk have only the town name as the other part of the name, so these support the proposal and are supported by WP:CONCISE, WP:COMMONNAME, and WP:NATURAL that we include necessary abbreviations and naturally disambiguate where possible. gidonb (talk) 16:54, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still doesn't change my vote. We include the acronym whether its FC, SC, VV, SL, AS, etc. for all football teams here. If you believe the consensus should be changed, raise it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football and we can go from there. RedPatch (talk) 12:08, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Such abbreviations are only sometimes included. Hopefully only where needed, such as in all examples that you provided and support this request to move. In the Netherlands I have seen no excessive VV or similar whatsoever, but for this club. Policies always trump attempts at other stuff exist arguments. And whatever rolls out here (it looked so straightforward but two opposes thus far, next to my opinion to move) will go on the records as my attempt to fix the name and to apply our policies and conventions also for this club. gidonb (talk) 15:44, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.