Talk:Trevor James

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 3 April 2019[edit]

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 section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 15:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


– No indication that the four-sentence stub for the academic rises to the level of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 07:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support In ictu oculi (talk) 10:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Pageviews seem fairly decisive in favour of the clergyman. PC78 (talk) 11:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per PC78. Dohn joe (talk) 15:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. If moved, it should be to Trevor James (theologian). "Academic" is a terrible disambiguator. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I would support Trevor James (theologian) or any other qualifier capable of gaining consensus. As for page views, every {hndis} page has entries which receive more page views than other entries on that same dab page. If page views were the key consideration in the selection of a dab page WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, then every dab page would have a primary topic and all the entries would be listed in order of page views, which may vary on a day-to-day basis.
However, as we all know, most dab pages have no primary topic because the standard for selection of a primary topic tends to be set fairly high in terms of national or international prominence beyond the narrow confines of the single dab page in question. As in the case of this dab page, there may be limited competition among three or four individuals whose stubs or brief articles suggest circumscribed notability or there may be heavier competition among a dozen or more same-named persons thus raising the bar for any candidate proposed as the primary topic.
The question may be also posed that if this dab page had no primary topic, would the Dean of Dunedin, whose entry appears in no other Wikipedia, be successfully nominated and raised to primary topic? —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 17:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your first point is demonstrably untrue. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says "much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined", so it is not simply the most page views that counts but a clear majority share, and that will not be the case with all hndis pages. It was not the case with Richard Benson or Henry Foley (historian), for example, both of which have passed through WP:RM in the last few months.
To answer your hypothetical question, if that's the move that had been proposed I personally would support based on exactly the same argument I gave above. However, if concensus deems that disambiguation is necessary, can I suggest Trevor James (Dean of Dunedin)? It looks to me like he is primarily notable for this role rather than as an academic or theologian, and there are plenty of other examples of such usage, Michael Brown (Dean of Wellington) and John Lynch (Dean of Canterbury) to name a couple. PC78 (talk) 01:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Should be Trevor James (priest) then. No need to be more verbose than that. There are other priests called John Lynch and Michael Brown, hence the need for the more detailed disambiguators. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would also support Trevor James (priest), if such a qualifier gains consensus. As for primary topic standards, if the bar is set very low, such as here, then a four-sentence stub, which is covered by no other Wikipedia, can indeed receive more views than the combined total of views for two other stubs which are likewise not covered by any other Wikipedia. In such cases it would not matter if the total number of views was in the thousands or in the teens.
Since most Wikipedia {hndis} primary topics have not been chosen in discussions such as this, but simply grandfathered from the time when they were created or possibly chosen as personal favorites of their respective creators, there is no objective set standard for a wider perspective as to the number of views, or interwiki links to other Wikipedias, a person should have before being eligible for consideration as a primary topic.
Although there are, as of this writing, 74 entries at the John Kennedy (disambiguation) page, John F. Kennedy is the undisputed WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT but, before 2005, the page had no primary topic. Some may quibble that one of the most extensive of all {hndis} pages, John Williams (disambiguation), with almost 200 entries (197, to be exact) nevertheless has the composer John Williams as the primary topic since 2005 (a nomination at Talk:John Williams/Archive 2#Requested move August 2012 was withdrawn).
Other than a short list of world leaders and internationally-renowned luminaries, most undiscussed putative primary topics, such as Trevor James, the Dean of Dunedin, should certainly be submitted for consensus-building as to their suitability for primary topic. Perhaps a listing at WP:WikiProject Disambiguation might bright greater participation. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Announcement of this discussion appears at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:26, 4 April 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Trevor_James&oldid=1207787910"