Talk:Askal

message: :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: procedural close. Consensus, albeit slim, was established in the prior discussion. The proper procedure is to discuss moving the article away from the Askal title, not to move it unilaterally. It would be fitting to open a RM to move to the Street dogs of the Philippines title. —C.Fred (talk) 20:41, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Street dogs of the Philippines →  – We just had a discussion last month. Let's do it again? Howard the Duck (talk) 02:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: That's nice of you to tag people who support your point of view, I just wonder why you didn't tag me in the previous discussion, are you canvassing? Sennen Goroshi !  (talk) 17:37, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

text: You should read WP:CANVAS before you proceed. Sennen Goroshi !  (talk) 17:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Howard pinged all the participants in the previous RM so this is not canvassing. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

text: , you should not have moved the page back in the first place. That  started a new discussion is a courtesy, and he would have been perfectly justified in just undoing your move (which I have just done). The status quo at this point, as per consensus, is the article name "Askal", and that you saw fit to batter that down does not suddenly put the result under temporal prorection. Do NOT move the page back unless you can establish a clear consensus for that. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:29, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, now I'm getting pissed.  could we please reaffirm the results of the above, standing move consensus so that  can be told in no uncertain terms where to stick his edit warring? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:34, 7 December 2019 (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.
Admins should follow the RM rules. I didn't open the RM, there wasn't clear consensus. Poor admin move. Sennen Goroshi !  (talk) 20:43, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

text: @Sennen goroshi: Then you should have opened a move review rather than unilaterally the page to your liking. Once is bold, twice is failure to "follow the RM rules". That's why the consensus established on 3 November was restored. —C.Fred (talk) 20:45, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

text: As I noted, there's nothing preventing you from opening a new RM—but you have to discuss moving it back to the prior title. —C.Fred (talk) 21:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 7 December 2019 (procedurally closed RM) 

message: If you were to advise the president of the Philippines on how to cope with the economic problems we are facing today to solve and improve the lives of the Filipino people, what would you tell him and why? Part 2: 1.37.86.177 (talk) 11:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  If you were to advise the president of the Philippines on how to cope with the economic problems we are facing today to solve and improve the lives of the Filipino people, what would you tell him and why?  

message: If you were to advise the president of the Philippines on how to cope with the economic problems we are facing today to solve and improve the lives of the Filipino people, what would you tell him and why? Part 2: 1.37.86.177 (talk) 11:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  If you were to advise the president of the Philippines on how to cope with the economic problems we are facing today to solve and improve the lives of the Filipino people, what would you tell him and why? Part 2: