Talk:Wonder Pets!

message: :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 move. No consensus the "!" is used in sources enough to qualify as the common name or to be otherwise preferable per Wikipedia conventions.--Cúchullain t/c 18:50, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Wonder Pets → Wonder Pets! – This page should be moved to its proper title, Wonder Pets!, as the show is spelled this way on the logo. Momsandy (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:51, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

text:  NickJr is not a reliable source for the title of anything.  My TVGuide shows it without one; my RogersTV menu shows it without one ... and we cannot trust those either.  the panda  ₯’ 20:32, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

text: *Comment - Actually, it is used in running text.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Momsandy (talk • contribs) 
*Oppose – None of Viacom's registered trademarks include the exclamation mark.  The logo is not relevant.  Dicklyon (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

text: But many of their copyrighted works contain an exclamation. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:18, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: And many don't; so what?  Dicklyon (talk) 05:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Didn't I say that? Are you responding to a specific point? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what redirects are for! :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:04, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

text: What does that even mean, "in the copyright", or "in copyright statements"?  Dicklyon (talk) 05:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: @Dicklyon - It means that the trademark name is "Wonder Pets!" and it is spelled on official documents that way. Momsandy (talk) 21:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you demonstrate this with a source? What are these "official documents" to which you refer? (Trademark search, FYI) And please use indents when replying to preserve the discussion threading. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:58, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

text: For the record, I don't have a preference. This is Momsandy's initiative. As it stands, I think it's sort of 50/50 whether or not it's worth moving since some sources include an exclamation, and some don't. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:01, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: @User:DangerousPanda - Why should shows like Wow! Wow! Wubbzy!, Go, Diego, Go!, Yo Gabba Gabba!, etc. have the exclamation mark when this one, too, has it necessary? It doesn't make sense for the page not to have it if it actually has it in the title.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Momsandy (talk • contribs) 18:56, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wow! Wow! Wobbzy is obviously different because exclamation marks occur in the middle of the sentence.  The other two are errors that we need not repeat - indeed, we should rush over there and start requested moves to get those corrected  the panda  ₯’ 19:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well said. Joefromrandb (talk) 22:10, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

text:  Also note that "Go, Diego, Go!" is a command, and "Yo Gabba Gabba!" is an interjection. Although I would prefer to see them moved to titles sans exclamation points, they are not as egregious as "Wonder Pets!". Joefromrandb (talk) 23:06, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

text:  Why yes; yes they did :-)  Next time I get called to ANI or ArbCom, perhaps I should call the WonderPets?  the panda  ₯’ 22:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Support: TV.com (http://www.tv.com/shows/wonder-pets/) and the show's official Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/wonderpets)refer to it with an exclamation mark, Acetotyce. 173.48.149.83 (talk) 19:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: TV.com is a user-contributed site. Don't think it meets WP:RS. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Just noticed that @Momsandy created a re-direct page that goes from "Wonder Pets!" (what we're discussing to move it to) to Wonder Pets (the current article). Does that solve the problem here? Luthien22 (talk) 04:08, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Hmm... it seems to only be for the talk page, not the actual article. Still, maybe a re-direct from "Wonder Pets!" to the current page might be the best solution here. Luthien22 (talk) 04:10, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

text: 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.
Note: Although signed as Momsandy, the edits above are currently associated with the user account of User:Libramedia. They do not appear in the contribution history of User:Momsandy. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 1 

message: :Wonder Pets → Wonder Pets! – This page should be moved to its proper title, Wonder Pets!, as the show is spelled this way on the logo. Momsandy (talk) 18:46, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  It wasn't moved before, therefore it's not a move review.  Just because I call a dog a "cat", that does not mean it's a cat  the panda  ɛˢˡ” 19:10, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: @DangerousPanda, you seemed supportive towards the move on Wonder Pets! until you thought Momsandy was "disruptively" moving things around and you got angry. In my opinion, you seem biased based on the user who started the move request, not the topic itself. It also seems to me that you are, in a way, intentionally harassing this MomSandy user for no good reason. I feel that you should stay out of this discussion, as your posts are always negative and, frankly, insulting towards this user. 173.48.149.83 (talk) 19:13, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If somebody closes a discussion, it's closed, and the above discussion certainly was. Discussions can be, and frequently are, closed as no consensus. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

text: * Exactly as Aussie says.  "No consensus" in AFD's and move discussions means "there is currently no consensus to take specific action at this time".  It does NOT mean "we couldn't decide, try again" - "no consensus" IS a valid community decision.  the panda  ɛˢˡ” 19:22, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: @EatsShootsAndLeaves - MomSandy isn't doing anything wrong - "consensus" was never reached and the discussion leader should have been notified before it was closed for no reason. You are acting like someone who should be blocked right now for being so harsh to Momsandy - I have reviewed the user's edit history and they are all good-faith. It appears that Momsandy is just a big fan of "Wonder Pets!" and wants the title to be spelled according to all official sources instead of the current, incorrect spelling. Also, the user does not seem to have much experience talking to other users on Wikipedia, and your actions towards Momsandy fall under the US cyberbullying identification methods. I am assuming Momsandy is likely younger than you; if you were speaking to this person in real life, would you act so churlishly? Remember the topic - the correctly spelled title - and not your anger towards the user. 173.48.149.83 (talk) 19:24, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

text: One could ask the very same question of an IP that edits only when registered editor is nowhere to be seen. If you have concerns, please open an SPI report. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:27, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Something's starting to smell fishy to me as well. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:55, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move review (requested move)