Rallying was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MotorsportWikipedia:WikiProject MotorsportTemplate:WikiProject Motorsportmotorsport
This article is part of WikiProject World Rally, an effort to create and improve rallying related articles on Wikipedia, including the FIA World Rally Championship. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more information.World RallyWikipedia:WikiProject World RallyTemplate:WikiProject World RallyWorld Rally
A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.
Rallying → Rally (motorsport) – "Rallying" remains vague, as it can apply in literally every other type of sport "rally" is a term as well as the stock market. It is not an adequate disambiguation. Britannica calls it "rally" [1] so that's what I went with here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (talk) 21:12, 22 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (talk) 18:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Oppose - Britannica does not care for sources or usage, or factual accuracies: for one, rallying by definition of any motorsport governing body is explicitly not racing like they say.
Your point sounds like it mixes Wikipedia articles for Wiktionary entries IMO. I never hear in other sports, or anybody at a political campaign rally that people are rallying to necessitate a move. There's nothing at Rally to suggest it needs to. Sure, a stock can be rallying, but is there ever likely to be an article for that?
Oppose Rallying is a sport in it's own right instead of being a description of something that can happen in other sports. It is a name. Noun vs verb. --Falcadore (talk) 11:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Political rallies have an alternative description and it's an activity with blurred distinction. Also "rallying" is not used to describe that act of a political rallies. Politics may have a claim on "rally", but not rallying. Rallying is the name of the sport. -- Falcadore (talk) 09:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
If Political rally is the common use, the redirect should be addressed before this proposal is necessary. Then, it should be discussed if Rally (politics) should be the correct article title.
I dispute your claim that the general public would see the political type first, especially outside North America. I'm certainly not able to recall usage of the term in the UK where I currently am.
As mentioned, article titles don't have to work like a dictionary. Disams and primary topics should be out of necessity, not completionism. Rally Wonk (talk) 22:20, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
The hits for "rallying" on Google News are 60% about the motorsport (30 out of the first 50 hits). Seven hits for the term "rallying cry". Four were about the stock market and another four about cryptocurrency. Two hits for political rallying and basketball, and one for baseball. Nobody disputes the multiple meanings for "rally" and "rallies". Prolog (talk) 07:45, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Agreed - nobody disputes the multiple meaning.
Google News uses profiling to give tailored results, it is not helpful to measure against as we don't know what of your personal information Google is using. I don't log in and am privacy conscious, the first 5 results I got was through prose - '(Politician/football manager) issues rallying cry/call'. It's not a topic, just a dictionary term being hit. The sixth result is "Rallying - Rovanpera overtakes Mikkelsen in Poland". That is topical use. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
On my user page you can read that Rally racing began as the official term in the United States by governing bodies that did not comply with the authority of the FIA, the international governing body for Rallying with member organisations in 200 territories. The FIA officially describes rallying as not racing. Category:Rallying also exists. There could be separate articles, but there is evidently no demand to contribute to what is an American name.
If there are sources for use of Rally racing from outside of the USA, it would support this proposal, else, I can't help but feel this point is USA vs ROTW for the second time. Rally Wonk (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
WP:RETAIN is very clear on this: "With few exceptions (...), there is no valid reason for changing from one acceptable option to another (English variety.)" "Rally racing" is synonymous with rallying, and that's the name that was used when the article was created. There is no valid reason not to use Rally racing as the article's title. 162 etc. (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
There's a touch of ignorance, disrespect and tunnel vision there. The rest of the world is irrelevant? Rally racing would have come long after, and as result of, the breakdown of AAA in the 50s, which itself came 45 years after the first rallies.
If the reliable sources exist for the current content under rally racing, please share some we could use with particular focus to:
Touring concentrations
Rallying on roads open to public traffic
Cross-country
Navigational rallies
TSDs
Eco-rallies
It seems to me you are on a personal mission to move a page for the sake of moving it, shaping arguments using any policies and archived conversations you can find, whilst showing no regard for having any understanding of the article subject itself. Rally Wonk (talk) 00:55, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
And it seems to me that you are completely disregarding well-established policies and guidelines in the name of keeping a title which fits well with your personal biases. 162 etc. (talk) 01:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
I accept the policies and guidelines in general. I challenged applying them to this article based on the facts and sources available. Then, I disregarded the irrelevant policies you mentioned.
Google Books has 1600 hits for "rallying" "world rally championship" and 200 hits for "rally racing" "world rally championship". 1500 hits for "rallying" "audi quattro" and 90 hits "rally racing" "audi quattro". "Rally racing" is clearly not the common name and the page was appropriately moved 20 years ago. Prolog (talk) 15:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Comment: The proposal does not suggest that Rallying should be used for anything like a disambiguation. After this move, Rallying would redirect to the new article. As the first eight words of the article are "Rallying is a wide-ranging form of motorsport...; the argument behind the proposal (that 'Rallying is vague'), is rather weak. Isn't it the case that if one wants to find out more about something, maybe they should read the article, not just the title?
Except that if you look through Google News, you will not find the motorsports topic, you will instead find the political one and the business one. Thus, motorsports isn't primary. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 06:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
The motorsport term is the primary topic because no other rallying article exists. That's different to notability or commonality which is maybe what you are trying to say? It's very hard to understand the need for disambiguation when:
Rallying (political) does not exist, and Political rally redirects to another article - meaning it is not even the primary topic within its own topic.
Rally (tennis) is a dictionary definition and not worthy of an article. It says see also Glossary of tennis terms which has the same content. I cannot read about the history of rallying in tennis, who the great rallying players are... There's not really anywhere this article can go.
Rally (stock market) is another dictionary definition, again not worthy of article. It probably is already, but should be another line in a glossary.
I'm not doubting use of the word rally or rallying or even whether they are topics. I question whether these are topics to be covered by an encyclopaedia article. Following that, is the need to disambiguate. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:57, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Oppose. This is the by far the most primary encyclopedic usage for "rallying". The proposal is definitely a solution looking for a problem. — Amakuru (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Comment: Don't know the answer here but noting that if you don't know what Rallying is supposed to be about, Rally race or Rally (motorsport) definitely make it clear. That said, sometimes terms are just bad and you have to use them. Mrfoogles (talk) 23:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
It does seem inconsistent to have the noun disambiguated but not the verb. How can we really tell that only one of these is ambiguous for the average English reader (note, not just the average politics fan or a sports fan)? --Joy (talk) 09:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Joy The verb here is the noun, it's the common name of the discipline/sport. It's not commonly known as motorsport rallying, car rallying, rally racing etc. Until another rallying use case article exists there's no policy to suggest it needs to be disambiguated. Anybody who reads the first sentence of this article is immediately informed what it is about. It makes sense to disam rally because of the articles that do exist. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
That's not what I'm saying. The average reader may well also recognize the sport as simply "rally", and know other things as "rallying". We're making those readers to go through extra navigation elements, but not those who recognize the sport as "rallying". How do we measure that the size of the former two contingents of readers is significantly smaller than the size of the latter? --Joy (talk) 16:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
To me, the common name is for the benefit of the average reader. Rallying is already listed on Rally and when I type 'rally' in the search box, rallying is the first suggested article, so I'm not sure where the extra steps are.
A good comparison here is auto racing, truck racing, motorcycle racing, boat racing etc... they are all doing words split from racing, (handily disambiguated already but rallying cannot justify this, especially as some rallies have various vehicles in the same event). Like rally, there are many different definitions of race. I could argue that racing should refer to those other forms too, say the the candidates are racing to the White house in the 'election race' found in 'other uses', but there is no encyclopaedic content to create for it. I've asked a few times but still not seen where the encyclopaedic content for the other 'rallying' things is. It still sounds like as somebody mentioned already, this is trying to solve an invented problem.
For the record, I would accept this proposal if it's for the right reasons, but so far I am not understanding any. That's why I am involving myself heavily in this discussion. Rally Wonk (talk) 16:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
That's the extra step, having to pick from the list. The same one that would be introduced if the motorsport article was moved. It's completely plausible that racing should be moved based on consistency, yes. --Joy (talk) 11:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
So there is scope for an encyclopaedic entry for Racing (election)? To me, it sounds like a dictionary entry for a word that would occasionally appear on Election or Elections in... articles, not a topic itself. I'm not seeing it at other encyclopaedias either, which is making it harder to understand this POV. Rally Wonk (talk) 15:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
