Talk:Bahamas and the American Civil War

Caribbean: Bahamas Start‑class Low‑importance

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Bahamas (assessed as Mid-importance).

Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

A fact from Bahamas and the American Civil War appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 18 August 2008, and was viewed approximately 1,219 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that due to the American Civil War, the Bahamas saw imports increase by a factor of 23, and exports increase by a factor of 29.6?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2008/August.

Wikipedia

Requested move

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Result was move all but Canada, which should be discussed separately. RockMagnetist(talk) 01:36, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

– The use of the preposition "in" implies these countries were in the war (as belligerent states) which they were not. Their citizens may have fought in the war and interesting bits of diplomatic relations may have occurred but the country itself was never in the War. Also for consistency with Australia and the American Civil War and United Kingdom and the American Civil War.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 04:07, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the problem is. In does not imply that these countries were participants to me; it simply means that the article is about the Bahamas in the period of the American Civil War. I oppose Bahamas and the American Civil War &c. as unnecessarily vague. However if others feel there is a problem with the current titles, how about Bahamas during the American Civil War? This is what we do for some other semi- or non-participants including Argentina during World War II, Cuba during World War II, Sweden during World War II and Switzerland during the World Wars. (Others still use in, though, including Portugal in World War II.) — AjaxSmack 01:19, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose "Canada", the territory of Canada was certainly featured in military operations in the American Civil War, so "in the American Civil War" would seem to apply. (ie. the St. Alban's Raid) -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:37, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support: 'and the' is clearly a better term as they were not 'in' the war. The alternative proposal of 'during the' made by AjaxSmack is not a good idea as that would suggest the article was about everything that happened in the country during the American Civil War. However the move should not be just to Bahamas but to The Bahamas which is its correct name. Ebonelm (talk) 09:03, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support' except Oppose the Canadian move (maybe that should be struck from the opening nom list). Randy Kryn 13:27, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I did a search on site:https://en.wikipedia.org/ and.

relevant results that showed the use of the conjunction were: Adam and Joe (a comedy duo); Show and tell (education) (where one thing works with another thing); Perth and Kinross (presenting two associated places; List of Parks and Recreation episodes (the closest parallel so far to the proposal); Yin and yang (opposites) and Victoria and Albert Museum (a reference to a married couple).

"And" is problematic though, arguably, not as problematic as "in". Greg Kaye 07:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support all. Srnec (talk) 16:32, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though perhaps it would be better to discuss the Canadian article separately. I agree with the nom and Ebonelm. Clearly "in" is less than ideal because these countries did not participate in the conflict and "during" implies coverage of the entirety of what happened in that country during that period. Other articles happily use this format and there don't seem to be any problems there. I'd also be OK with Ebonelm's suggestion to add "The" for The Bahamas. Jenks24 (talk) 11:20, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, but alternatively recommend Merging into an existent Bahamian history article or sub-section. The present length suggests a lack of sufficient notable material for a stand-alone article.Froglich (talk) 19:00, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support all per nom. "in" is wrong. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:38, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.