Talk:3DS Cheep Cheep Lagoon

Should I move this to a different page such as (MK7) or just (course) so that it doesn't conflict with here? - 07:47, 30 May 2014 (EDT)
 * Yeah, but "(course)" is still too vague and uninformative considering there's another golf course variation of it. "(race course)" would be a better identifier. Afterwards this could just be turned into a disambiguation page, I guess.
 * That, and maybe even (race track) would be better. - 08:16, 30 May 2014 (EDT)

Change name for cheep cheep lagoon.
DON'T RENAME 1-13

It has been decided that this article will vote for a new name.

Proposer: Deadline: August 6th, 2014, 23:59 GMT

New Name

 * 1) I think it should have a new name' because there is also this.

Keep the same name

 * 1) I vote on this, because this isn't the only case of two things in the SM series sharing a name and one of our articles not having anything in parentheses in the name. See Bowser's Castle.
 * 2) Per 'Shroom64. The only other name this article can be called that's an official name is Cheep Cheep Cape, but according to this, the North American name is the one we use. Therefore it should stay the same.
 * 3) If you're not going to state what name you're exactly going to change to, I'm going to state that I'll oppose this proposal. Per the others too.
 * 4) Per Baby Luigi. Present an argument and I'll change my vote accordingly.
 * 5) If your basing it off what u said above, that issue is long gone. Of there  is only one article that contradicts with this name (Cheep Cheep Lagoon (golf course)), then is is no need for tis article to be moved. Suggest possible revisiting of Cheep Cheep Lagoon becomes a thing.
 * 6) There's an abundance of pages with the same name. It's not an issue.
 * 7) "Cheep Cheep Lagoon" is the exact name in the game itself, so why rename it?
 * 8) Per all.
 * 9) Moving to what? Per all.
 * 10) Per all.
 * 11) Per all.
 * 12) Per all.
 * 13) If you want to change the name entirely, I oppose because the name is official from the NTSC-U version of the game, and according to the Naming Policy, this becomes the name of the article. If you instead wants to add an identifier, I oppose because again according to the Naming Policy: If there is one subject that is clearly more popular than the other(s), the popular subject (in this case, the race course) will keep the original title while the other(s) use identifiers. Similar to Tick Tock Clock and Tick-Tock Clock (race course), I'm sure that 70% of users searching for "Cheep Cheep Lagoon" will be expecting to meet the race course, not the golf course.

Comments
Is this supposed to be a Talk Page Proposal? You're supposed to use the respective format.
 * I fixed it this time, but you need to be sure to use the proper format and add it in the Proposals page, okay?

I think the proposal is to change it into Cheep Cheep Lagoon (modifier). 15:12, 24 July 2014 (EDT)
 * I think it's based on what I said above, to Cheep Cheep Lagoon (race course) or something. Either way, that doesn't needed to happen unless there is heaps of em. - 17:02, 24 July 2014 (EDT)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is NO way I can win NOW!
 * ...What. There's more than one oppose asking you to explain what you want it to be moved to. Do that and maybe some people will change their minds. Either way, whining about it won't help anything.--Vommack (talk) 17:54, 24 July 2014 (EDT)


 * Joseph, please stop overreacting over a proposal or something, It's very annoying.
 * He's right; there's no punishment or even downside to losing a proposal. You simply lose it, and at least you learn what's wrong with your idea. Anyway, yes, you should provide what the new name should be (though it won't really counter my reason to oppose), and don't react like that just because the odds are slim for you.
 * @Random Bob-omb: This is why
 * @Vommack: There's an abundance of pages? What kind of reasoning is that?
 * - 02:52, 25 July 2014 (EDT)
 * Well, there's only two Cheep Cheep Lagoons, so I think either he was referring to something else or used the wrong word.
 * Has anyone read my comments above before this proposal? I'm guessing that he's basing his argument on that. - 16:55, 25 July 2014 (EDT)
 * There are plenty of pages that share names with another page. I was pointing out that "this shares a name with (article)" isn't a good argument.--Vommack (talk) 18:54, 25 July 2014 (EDT)
 * Sorry, didn't get what you meant, Sounded like you meant there's heap of pages with this name, so it's not a problem. Do you mean there isn't an abundance of pages, so it isn't worth it? - 18:57, 25 July 2014 (EDT)
 * I have read the comments above, you can tell by reading my oppose. I think that some people were confused on this matter because Joseph didn't provide a name to move it to.

I was going to move the name to Cheep Cheep Lagoon (Race Track)
 * It sounds applicable, but I am opposing because it seems unnecessary. If left alone, it won't be left as the only article where there's another with the exact name but with a parentheses modifier. I typed "disambiguation" and got a few results of disambiguation pages but with other articles sharing the same name (albeit without the "(disambiguation)" of course). Aside from my earlier example of Bowser's Castle, there is Yoshi, Spike, Big Bertha, Donkey Kong, Chomp, and the list goes on.
 * I would suggest redoing this proposal if Cheep Cheep Lagoon becomes a recurring place, which reminds me, I should move Shifting Sands and create Yoshi's Island (golf course) instead of having it here - 17:45, 26 July 2014 (EDT)