Jump to content

Talk:Wang Dan

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

Requested move 16 January 2017

[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) JudgeRM (talk to me) 03:48, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Wang DanWang Dan (disambiguation) – restoring dab to original page; this is connected to the request above. — Gorthian (talk) 02:14, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC) (And then move Wang Dan (dissident) to Wang Dan.)[reply]
  • Oppose The 2009 Rm consensus is no longer valid after the creation of Wang Dan (Song dynasty), one of the longest-serving grand councilors in the Song dynasty. To put things into perspective, Song dynasty with a population of 50-100 million in the 11th century was the most populous empire in the world, and Wang Dan was the second most powerful man in that empire for 12 straight years (behind an emperor totally uninterested in governing). As has been discussed in previous Primary topic RMs such as Talk:Sun Yue (basketball), long-term significance is also an important factor to consider when determining a primary topic. There are also many other important "Wang Dan"'s through history that should be translated from zh.wiki, such as zh:王誕, zh:汪旦, etc. Timmyshin (talk) 08:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - the dissident is better known today and probably gets more page views, but the Grand Councilor (equivalent to Prime Minister) was certainly far more influential in history. There are also a number of other Wang Dan's, some with English articles, some without. On balance, I agree with Timmyshin that there is no primary topic in this case. -Zanhe (talk) 00:01, 17 January 2017 (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.