Requested move 13 February 2025

– These are not World Series. The first World Series was held in 1903. See World Series. 162 etc. (talk) 05:09, 13 February 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:48, 20 February 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 09:52, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral – While nobody in the 1880s–1890s called these series the "World Series", they are known as such retroactively. Alternatively, they were also known as the "World's Series". Take Super Bowl I. The game was called the AFL–NFL World Championship Game at the time (and IMO, the top of the infobox should say that and not the retroactive name of "Super Bowl I"), but yet the article is called "Super Bowl I". The same goes with Super Bowl II. It's in the same vein of 1903 Major League Baseball season. Nobody had termed "Major League Baseball" for several decades after the fact, but yet, the article is still named as such, for convenience sake (it could technically be "1903 Organized Baseball season", though this is an archaic term that's ambiguous in meaning and has racial overtones). I'm in favor of using "World's Championship Series" over "World Series" in the articles themselves, but perhaps the page title should remain "World Series". Spesh531(talk, contrib., ext.) 16:26, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, the xxxx Major League Baseball season titles are problematic - I'd argue that the first singular "Major League Baseball" season was in 1997, when interleague play was introduced - but that's beyond the scope of this RM. 162 etc. (talk) 16:46, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd personally argue 2000, when the two leagues became one legal entity, but that's neither here nor there! Spesh531(talk, contrib., ext.) 18:06, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, lowercase 'world's championship series, "World Series" is not a catch-all name, it refers to the specific series of games between the American and National Leagues which began in 1903. The proposed name may not be the best, but if used this wouldn't it be lowercased as it is not a formal or proper name? Was it used at the time of play? Randy Kryn (talk) 04:58, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no one consistent name that was used by primary sources. Even the teams in this early era were often referred to by different names. 162 etc. (talk) 05:07, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject New York City, WikiProject New York Mets, WikiProject Baseball/Old-time Base Ball task force, and WikiProject Baseball have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPathtalk 09:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No tags for this post.