Forum:CT Archive/Revising nomenclature of battle articles

Recently we had a conversation going over in the Senate Hall regarding how our articles for battles are titled, and it went well enough that I thought I'd bring up a CT on it.

The sparknotes version:
 * Far too many of our battle articles are either arbitrarily conjecturally titled 'first,' 'second,' (etc) or else have an arbitrary/inconsistent conflict parenthesis tacked on the end
 * It would be better if we could make these more uniform and remove conjecture

Proposal: Battle articles, when not otherwise uniquely named, should be titled simply as "Battle of x" with the year in which they took place in parentheses on the end. This will allow us to simplify the naming process for battle articles so that they're both easier to create and easier to find later, excise conjectural naming, and make the titling policy more uniform across the board.

Example: For instance, battles of Dathomir...
 * Battle of Dathomir (3 ABY) would replace the conjectural First Battle of Dathomir (Galactic Civil War) title &mdash; this was never titled "First" at any point, and having it such is unnecessary conjecture that can be corrected
 * Battle of Dathomir (8 ABY) would replace Battle of Dathomir (Zsinj campaign) &mdash; the Zsinj campaign is part of the Galactic Civil War, so naming by conflict only doesn't work

Exceptions to be approached on a case-by-case basis, but offhand a couple examples:
 * Specifically named instances, such as First Battle of Ruusan (and the other six, etc) should remain as-is, apprending a year only if there's another conflict with an identical name
 * Multiple conflicts at the same location in the same year,such as the first and second Battles of Harte Secur, could potentially be problematic&mdash;though no moreso than they are currently

Adopt

 * 1) As proposer. &mdash; DigiFluid(Whine here) 18:41, January 30, 2013 (UTC)

Discuss
Potentially this sort of thing could be adapted to fit other sorts of articles as well, but I'd like to keep the focus narrowed to this particular subject for the purposes of this CT. &mdash; DigiFluid(Whine here) 18:41, January 30, 2013 (UTC)