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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Those opposed to the proposed move were more numerous, and they provided rationales based on the WP:CRITERIA. Much of the debate was over the COMMONNAME, with sources supporting both titles. Editors noted that newer, more official sources tend to use Holbeach AWR, with colloquial usage and signage favoring RAF Holbeach. In the absence of a clear winner on that point, it came down to the other criteria, mainly precision. More participants and the greater strength of arguments favored the status quo. (non-admin closure) Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Holbeach Air Weapons Range → RAF Holbeach – the former page/article title was fine "RAF Holbeach", this is the official name still in use, gate entrance to the site also states "Royal Air Force Holbeach". Nightsturm (talk) 22:21, 8 March 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 04:51, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Lennart97 (talk) 13:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Nightsturm: Have you asked Buckshot06? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 19:08, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • My impression was that the official name was Defence Infrastructure Organisation Holbeach Air Weapons Range (a mouthful!!) since transfer to the DIO in 2006-07 (eg. (1) Archived RAF Marham site 2016 at https://web.archive.org/web/20160324181012/http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafmarham/stationfacilities/holbeachrange.cfm; (2) MOD 2018 document at https://airspacechange.co.uk/documents/download/328.pdf; (3) 2017 Christmas & NY closure announcement at https://www.spaldingwildfowlers.co.uk/single-post/2017/12/12/dio-holbeach-range-egd-207-closure-for-christmas-and-new-year-grant; (4) Paulspot move at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Holbeach_Air_Weapons_Range&diff=1024201323&oldid=1024200336 and second move; plus (5) searches for "DIO Holbeach" on Google). It does not appear to be under the control of the RAF, rather DIO. I only moved the page after I saw in the history that Paulspot had attempted to change the title, in line with several of the other Air Weapons Ranges and the DIO changeover. I would not have moved the page had I believed the official title was still RAF Holbeach. I think we need to have a reliable sources-for-the-site-name compilation, including some sort of photo for the main gate sign!! The DIO pamphlet attached at note-1 is clearly colloquial, written to maximise civilian understanding, who generally wouldn't know or care about the DIO; the Lincolnshire County Council ref is not MOD and thus less accurate.
  • My guess is that nobody's changed the gate sign, DIO simply isn't worried about what the gate sign says, and colloquially of course everybody in the locality still calls it an RAF station.
  • If that is the case we face a WP:COMMONNAME issue: what the people in the locality call it? or what the organisation charts in HQ DIO Sutton Coldfield designate it? Buckshot06 (talk) 04:09, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • MOD estate information, see MOD Establishments, Defence Estate Development Plan Annex A (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/33240/DEDP09_annex_a.pdf or https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/defence-estates-development-plan-dedp-2009) which sets out the authoritative framework, looking forward to 2030, for the coherent development of the estate to meet the future needs of defence, and the priorities for investment and rationalisation arising from it. The document indicates: Serial 190, Govt Region: East Midlands, DE Regions: North, TLB: AIR, Core Site: RAF HOLBEACH Lincs, Future years from 2009: 2019-2030, Site Function: RAF Range, Interdependency: DTR, SPEC 024 Code: HOLB, Size Hectares: 716, Postcode: PE12 9NJ, Constituency: South Holland & the Deepings. Its description might be colloquially referred to as an "Air Weapons Range", but the core site is officially RAF Holbeach. Its Top Level Budget-Holder (TLB) is AIR = Air Command (one of the four military commands; Navy, Army, Air, Joint Forces), it does not indicate DIO = The Defence Infrastructure Organisation. DIO is only responsible for operational support. Nightsturm (talk) 05:14, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • This is a puzzle. The general descriptive RAF documents from the supervising site, Marham, in 2016, call it DIO Holbeach AWR; 2017, 2018 things; you quote a very authoritative document but which is ten years older. So, (a) I think we need third parties who can give opinions on whether your Estates document from 2009 supersedes the more up to date "DIO Holbeach AWR" official references that I've dug up; (b) can you get a photo of the main gate sign, since you clearly are a local? That might settle the whole issue in your favour!! Cheers 102.140.240.12 (talk) 05:31, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • A flickr.com user has two photos referencing RAF Holbeach, showing the site's main gate entrance both taken/dated 13 May 2018, one photo shows the left-side wall gate entrance "Royal Air Force Holbeach" (https://www.flickr.com/photos/97001900@N06/42160576462/in/photostream/) and another photo shows the right-side wall with the signage Defence Infrastructure Organisation…Holbeach Air Weapons Range (https://www.flickr.com/photos/97001900@N06/27335571567/in/photostream/). Nightsturm (talk) 06:00, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • Savills who are selling this area/site as an agent since July 2019 on behalf of the private owner, also indicates the sale is subject to a lease to the Ministry of Defence and reference RAF Holbeach, who use the north part of the land as an academic air weapons range, see: https://assets.savills.com/properties/GBLNRULIR180024/LIR180024_LIR19000403.PDF. Nightsturm (talk) 06:24, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • The Commander of RAF Lakenheath (USAFE), in Lakenheath Instruction, Nuclear, Space, Missile, Command and Control, AIRFIELD AND FLYING OPERATIONS, document dated 15 June 2021, on pages 68 & 70, specifically references "RAF Holbeach" (https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/lakenheath/publication/lakenheathi11-250/lakenheathi11-250.pdf). Nightsturm (talk) 07:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
          • Clearly we've both dug up lots of official documents saying that *both* names are in use. I would argue that usages of "RAF Holbeach" are colloquial, but that's up for discussion. The gate sign(s) lists *both* names, and could be used as evidence for both article titles, or even DIO Holbeach AWR, as Paulspot originally advocated. I think we definitely need some third opinions here. Buckshot06 (talk) 12:11, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
            • @Buckshot06: I would suggest Keith D might well be in a position to offer a third opinion. Nightsturm (talk) 13:31, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
              • Thankyou for your suggestion. I think there are lots of potential third opinion givers: I have made a post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Holbeach Air Weapons Range or RAF Holbeach? to ask for third opinions, and please do make some comments there to put your side of the story. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:59, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
                • Shouldn't this just be a full RM? -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:11, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nightsturm, GeoffreyT2000, Buckshot06, 102.140.240.12, and Kj cheetham: See here. Lennart97 (talk) 13:44, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• This is tricky because it looks like both names are in use... Of the common names I lean towards Holbeach Air Weapons Range for its descriptive value. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:23, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• For follow-up reference, I made a telephone call to the RAF Holbeach station today 15 March 2022, and the staff officially introduce themselves as "RAF Holbeach, air range" and nothing else. Nightsturm (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting discussion. I would tend to agree that the article should be named "Holbeach Air Weapons Range".

If the site was still officially called RAF Holbeach then it seems unlikely that DIO would install a new sign saying Holbeach AWR. The RAF Holbeach sign would appear to have simply been left over rather than removed when the new sign was put up. On that basis I'm fairly convinced the official name is Holbeach AWR.

The continued use of RAF Holbeach is largely colloquial or in some cases just left over from when it was under RAF control. This seems to occur with many sites that were formerly RAF stations but are retained for other military roles such as training airfields (e.g Little Rissington, Kirknewton etc)

In considering WP:COMMONNAME, as said above I agree there is evidence that some still use RAF Holbeach. However, I think using it for the title would now be somewhat misleading as the RAF no longer operate it and I think its fairly clear that it's no longer officially known as an RAF station. Holbeach AWR as a title is clear and precise as to what the article is about (if not more so than RAF Holbeach) and using it shouldn't cause anyone looking for the article any problems in finding it, meeting the requirements of WP:CRITERIA. It would also be consistent with Tain AWR and Donna Nook AWR articles, though I did only rename them fairly recently. Thx811 (talk) 22:26, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• All highway road signs to the site also state "RAF Holbeach". See examples: #1 https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8413026,0.1708081,3a,20.9y,59.08h,89.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1satDgQeN6boOxIT8pBx2hgw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192, and #2 https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8481765,0.1264744,3a,75y,288.42h,77.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sS4qbOtj4ozXBkd4Gvs2agg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 (Google image capture dated September 2021). Nightsturm (talk) 00:05, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  RRH Staxton Wold is still signposted as RAF Staxton Wold..... The joy of all things (talk) 19:50, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The Royal Air Force (Regular & Reserve) website clearly indicates under "OUR BASES": RAF HOLBEACH (BOMBING RANGE), (See: https://www.raf.mod.uk/recruitment/our-bases) Nightsturm (talk) 04:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I wouldn't place much reliance on the list at the RAF recruitment website as its lists numerous sites that are closed: Prestwick (closed 2013), Amport (2020), Linton-on-Ouse (2020) and still has Wyton as Wyton-Brampton (2012). It also lists all the AWR's as RAF sites when it's clear they are no longer RAF facilities. The most recent up to date (Jan 2022) MOD source I can find describes it as "Holbeach AWR": https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/military-low-flying-air-weapons-ranges-activity/air-weapons-range-out-of-hours-activity-october-2021 and it has been referred to similarly ("Air Weapons Range Holbeach") by the MOD as far back as 2013 (p.81): https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/249994/Sanctuary_mag__number_42_2013.pdf.

  We could go on forever finding sources to support one position over the other, but so far I haven't seen anything that to persuade me that we shouldn't use Holbeach AWR as the article title. The MOD website and the MOD sign at the site call it that and anything referring to it as RAF Holbeach is either non-official or left over from when it was an RAF site. Thx811 (talk) 17:47, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]