Talk:GWR Records

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Labels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of record labels 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.Record LabelsWikipedia:WikiProject Record LabelsTemplate:WikiProject Record Labelsrecord labels articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Metal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal music 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.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal articles

Guinness World Records[edit]

The consensus is to use the hatnote:

Not to be confused with Guiness World Records.

Cunard (talk) 01:14, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

If @Georgia guy: feels there may be confusion over the name, then simply place a WP:HAT at the top of the article - there is never justification to discuss what the article is not about in the article itself. 109.147.240.10 (talk) 16:01, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some registered Wikipedian please reveal your opinions on the edit this user keeps reverting. Georgia guy (talk) 16:14, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Try putting in a WP:RFC 109.147.240.10 (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment[edit]

The article's subject is the record company GWR Records. Within the artcle's prose, should it be stated that it is not about the Guiness World Records? Should Guiness World Records be a hatnote on the article? 109.147.240.10 (talk) 12:40, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The bot asked me here. I propose the following wp:hatnote:

EllenCT (talk) 05:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support seems simple and concise. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:08, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.