The following discussion is an archived 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: no consensus with a dash of wrong forum. A requested move discussion is not the place to decide whether a split should occur, and there's no consensus as to what title to move to anyway. I suggest starting a new thread on this talk page if the nominator wants to discuss a split, or just be bold and split it -- there's at least some support for that action shown below. —Darkwind (talk) 23:22, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Amazing Race Canada → The Amazing Race Canada 1 – There is going to be a second season. Relisted. BDD (talk) 23:20, 25 September 2013 (UTC) – Jwkozak91 (talk) 04:41, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support move the season article to a season name, and replace with a series article. -- 70.24.249.39 (talk) 05:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support the idea but not the suggested name. Convention would have us use "The Amazing Race Canada (season 1)". PKT(alk) 11:49, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convention in Template:The Amazing Race suggests that international versions of the show go 1, 2, 3 – and not (season 1), (season 2), (season 3). – Jwkozak91 (talk) 21:28, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support but also agree with PKT Support. But I also feel that "The Amazing Race Canada (season 1)" would be better because the proposed name is ambiguous as "1" is not very descriptive as it implies that is the show's actual name. But whatever happens, meh... (On a similarly related note, it would tidy up the mess of the names of the Latin American version's articles like "The Amazing Race 1 (Latin America) to "The Amazing Race (Latin America season 1)" ) --Kartoffel ⁰⁷ 07:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment See Talk:Junk Raiders for a similar displacement of a season 1 article off generic name. -- 65.92.181.39 (talk) 05:01, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• No offense intended to anyone who has worked on these articles, but the situation here and with Junk Raiders is pretty stupid. We should do what we do for every other TV show. There should be a page at the base title about the show itself, and individual articles on seasons. It's not that hard. So I suppose I support per IP. --BDD (talk) 18:58, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It appears the Junk Raiders move is failing. -- 76.65.131.217 (talk) 04:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. This is a cause for a split, not a move. There will still need to be a general article on the show, The Amazing Race Canada, of which season 1, season 2, etc., will be subtopics. bd2412 T 21:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see why you'd want to separate the edit history of season 1 from the season 1 article. It'd make more sense to keep the history of the content of season 1 with the season 1 article, instead of removing the edit history for season 1. -- 76.65.131.217 (talk) 04:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • See what I did with Junk Raiders for a model. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I would like to apologize for not using precise language to start this debate. At present I think a split would be more appropriate, perhaps using The Amazing Race Australia as a template. – Jwkozak91 (talk) 05:58, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Per BDD and Jwkozak91, this is a case for a split, not a move. Split material on the first season to a new article and keep the main article about the show as a whole where it is.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Almost the entirety of this article would only be concerned with season 1, as would almost all the contribution history. If you split it and 90% of the content was moved off to the season 1 article, you are removing the contribution history from the contributions. If you move the page and then split a series article from the season 1 article, then you leave the contribution history attached to the page where the editors contributed content. -- 76.65.131.217 (talk) 05:23, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support. The split can could get an option in move. Likewise, in The Amazing Race Philippines, one good editor from the Philippines had moved the original article into its and first only season just before the Philippine Race franchise started in 2012. ApprenticeFan ^work 03:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment If moved, the content history can be retained and referred to without too many problems by placing ((Copied)) or similar on the respective talk pages. -- Trevj (talk) 10:55, 15 October 2013 (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.