This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics 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.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports articles
Assess : newly added and existing articles, maybe nominate some good B-class articles for GA; independently assess some as A-class, regardless of GA status.
Cleanup : * Sport governing body (this should-be-major article is in a shameful state) * Field hockey (History section needs sources and accurate information - very vague at the moment.) * Standardize Category:American college sports infobox templates to use same font size and spacing. * Sport in the United Kingdom - the Popularity section is incorrect and unsourced. Reliable data is required.
* Fix project template and/or "to do list" Current version causes tables of content to be hidden unless/until reader chooses "show."
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Games, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.GamesWikipedia:WikiProject GamesTemplate:WikiProject GamesGames articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
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.
If we did that, we would probably have others who would argue that the move should then be reverted per WP:PRECISE. The proposed option is a more WP:NATURALDAB option. Steel1943 (talk) 14:56, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But it is naturally disambiguating the article from a concept that doesn't exist. — AjaxSmack 16:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
...What a conundrum... Steel1943 (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The current name is too generic. It doesn't give any idea that this is only about sports. JIP | Talk 18:35, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The intro sentence says "sports" and "games", so also games. (and it's carrying a game-stub) This used to be WPCHESS reflecting the original version of the article, that had emphasis on chess, so games. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:01, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the proposed move because the proposed title strongly implies there is a larger coherent encyclopedic concept of the "rest of the world" of which this article is a subset. Support a move to a title with a parenthetical disambiguator like that suggested by User:Lugnuts above for the reasons given by other users. What do others think? — AjaxSmack 16:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I also fail to see what the actual confusion is too. The article has existed since 2003 and is only now an issue? What other primary use(s) of "Rest of the world" are there? If there are others outside of sport, they can be handled by a hatnote/dab page. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 16:27, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree but gratuitous addition of text in titles to "disambiguate" is a growing fad. I suppose I'm getting into the spirit, too. — AjaxSmack 16:35, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is not just for disambiguation, this is for WP:PRECISION, since the current title is insufficient to describe the topic accurately. And the term "rest of the world" actually is used in the real world in contexts other than sports and games. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:29, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Rest of the world" is simply far too generic to be about sports, games, or any other singular field of interest. If anything, "rest of the world" should be either a disambiguation page, or an article about the view of one geographical or ethnic entity towards, you know, all the others in the world. JIP | Talk 18:58, 23 August 2015 (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.
