Talk:Military specialism

Requested move 1

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

---

Military occupations → Military careers – It has been pointed out, most recently at the Talk:Soviet occupations#Requested move that "occupations" can refer to career paths or military operations, so it's especially confusing to discuss the former in a military context. We currently have articles Military occupation and Military occupations, along with the categories ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Military occupation and ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Military occupations (the former, at least, is against category naming conventions). I'd like to come up with a new name for this article which can be passed along to the corresponding category. I think Military careers is the best concise way of referring to the topic, but I'm not against a bit more wordiness for the sake of accuracy, such as Military careers and trades, Military careers and specializations, or even Military careers and occupations. I would support any reasonable alternative, for that matter.

Either way, my intent is that Military occupations will redirect to Military occupation, and the category now called ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Military occupation will become ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Military occupations. BDD (talk) 21:22, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Support. The term "occupations" has to go away from any military career-related topic. The terms "occupation" and "occupations" should be reserved for the operations.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 21:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Support Given the double meaning of military occupation this is a prudent move that removes any potential for ambiguity.--Labattblueboy (talk) 01:29, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Support: As the one who originally started the Soviet occupations RM, I believe that we should make things clearer for the reader, and avoid using phrasing which carry ambiguous meanings as much as possible. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:17, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

• Support move, for reasons clearly explained in the nomination. - WPGA2345 - ☛ 06:54, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived 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: No consensus to move. Withdrawing my relist and closing, per request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure. After full listing period, there are two valid oppose votes, and the nominator has also requested it be close as no move (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 17:52, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

---

Military careers → Military service occupation – More satisfactory title, matching existing categories ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Military service occupations by country and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Military supporting service occupations. The current title "Military careers" conflicts with ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Military careers which is in all other respects a good name for that category. The requested move would break the logjam at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_November_7#Category:Military_occupation. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC) – Fayenatic London 22:46, 15 January 2014 (UTC) – Fayenatic London 22:46, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose same problem as why it was renamed in Requested Move 1. Occupation of territory by a particular military service. (Such as Marines occupying a beach, while the Army holds a hill, so each service is holding specific territory) Though the current title is not without its own problems (this is about jobs, not biographic careers of individuals) -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 06:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose, reasoning from the previous discussion applies just as well to this proposal. - WPGA2345 - ☛ 22:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

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.

Proposed rename of related category at CFD 2014 Jan 27

I have proposed that the related category be renamed to Category:Military job titles. Please comment at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 January 27#Category:Military occupations. IMHO, Military job titles would be a better name for this article as well, but perhaps the category can go first this time. – Fayenatic London 14:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

That resulted in ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Military specialisms so I have WP:BOLDly moved this page to military specialism accordingly. – Fayenatic London 14:45, 20 February 2014 (UTC)