Im sorry Laura but youre not looking at this move objectively Yes its true that some editors were essentially making the let the WikiProject decide argument and thats a junk argument You may be familiar with WikiProject Birds insistence on titlecase capitalization for bird articles which I oppose or at least gripe about at any opportunity But the opposers were not the only ones making junk arguments The accusations of sexism were uncalled for there and some of the namecalling thereof was really beneath the standards of dialogue we ought to aim for Furthermore its simply not true to say that there is no policybased rationale for opposing the request PRIMARYTOPIC is a plenty legitimate reason which to a certain extent overrides PRECISE and certainly doesnt inherently contradict NPOV And I really dont understand your appeal to V In the discussion you mentioned that its verifiable that there are mens and womens teams but that seemed a quintessentially straw man argument Literally no one was arguing that there is no womens team Look Im probably more sympathetic to your overall argument than the oppose voters If I were against the move on the merits I wouldve voted instead of closing But theres a larger conversation that needs to happen here Wikipedia follows usage in other sources so is systemic bias ok if present in those sources I dont think theres a right or easy answer to that question Where we have articles on a countrys mens and womens teams I wouldnt be upset to see a broader decision that they should be named explicitly perhaps with a dab at the base title At the same time Im not sure I would participate in that discussion There were junk arguments on both sides of this RM but there were also some very good ones on both sides Thats no consensus