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: NOT MOVED (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:54, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Agent Carter characters → Agent Carter characters – Good articles cannot be lists (see Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria#What_cannot_be_a_good_article). There was consensus this is more an article than a list when it was nominated for being a Featured List (see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Agent Carter characters/archive1. If we agree that this is an article and not a list then the title should not contain "List of". The simplest solution I see would be to rename it to an article name. I tried Agent Carter characters, but would be happy with "Characters from Agent Carter" or some other concoction that removes "List of" AIRcorn (talk) 00:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I am not convinced that it's a good idea to allow the criteria of meta classifications to determine the titles of mainspace articles. Moving the page may be beneficial, but whether or not this will retain GA status shouldn't be a factor in the decision. Dekimasuよ! 05:41, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  I came across it when fixing Wikipedia:Good articles/mismatches and thought it was a bit strange that a list was a good article. I have no intention to delist it at this stage, in fact that is why I went for the rename route. Especially after I noticed the comments at the GA review and Featured List attempt regarding the issue. If there is consensus that this is an article and not a list renaming it seems like an easy solution as having "List of" in the title unambiguously classifies it as a list. AIRcorn (talk) 06:13, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I am not sure about the suggested destination. While rare, I can only remember seeing these kinds of articles named as "Characters from/in/of ...". There is a lot of variation and I'm unsure which is best. This might be something we've never centrally discussed before. -- Netoholic @ 10:12, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now: I know that it was decided that this was more of an article than a list during the FL and GA process due to the amount of content it has, but that doesn't change the fact that this still literally lists the Agent Carter characters. So I can understand having an issue with the mismatch, but that doesn't change the fact that "List of Agent Carter characters" is a completely appropriate title given the formatting of the page. - adamstom97 (talk) 11:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Primarily remains an article to list characters; they all have their own sections. -- Alex^TW 11:51, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Adam. As he stated, this is literally a list of characters for Agent Carter, and follows the guidelines for creating such an article established by MOS:TV and WP:NCTV, so I don't believe the article title should change. As has been noted, the article was nominated as a featured list, but was told in that discussion to nominate for GA (hence the mismatch), so if some other discussion needs to be had regarding how to handle articles such as this, that might be the proper thing to move forward with. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:38, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. The overwhelmingly consistent convention is "List of Foo characters". There are some "Characters of Foo" articles, mostly confined to video game topics, and handful of "Characters in" or "Characters from" outliers, but these should be RMed to "List of characters in Foo" names per WP:CONSISTENCY, except in the rare case that they are not lists. As for this article, while it is a "richer than usual" list, it's still a list. This possibly-snowball WP:RM will likely be a clear consensus that the procedural rejection of this page at WP:FLC was an error. I strongly agree with Dekimasu that whether or not a particular title could affect GA qualification is irrelevant. And if anyone at GA or FAC/FAL are basing their decision making on the article title rather than it's actual content, they're making a mistake anyway.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:28, 2 June 2018 (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.