Talk:Arun

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Requested move 1 August 2018[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: moved. There is consensus to move per the discussion below. (non-admin closure) The editor whose username is Z0 12:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arun (disambiguation) → Arun
Arun → Arun District

– The district is normally called "Arun District" even if it wasn't there is no primary topic [[1]]. The entries probably need moving to Arun (given name) and Arun (surname). Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:23, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Not primary, given the existence of the river after which it is named amongst other articles. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:21, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I agree. In the meantime I've given the page a good cleanup and removed duplicate entries to the given name page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:00, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak oppose~~Neutral The problem I have is that on similar previous moves such as for Bray perfectly valid links were left pointing at a DAB page. So it is important a commitment to Wikipedia:FIXDABLINKS is done after such moves. Because of the number of such moves in progress I have some questions if that is properly being done on all occasions. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:15, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The inbound links aren't a major issue with the moves, in that (and similar cases) the majority of the links were corrected within a few days, by me and other editors. If we always took that view, we would still have Washington referring to the state, and many other inappropriate topics. I am happy to help clear up links after moves but I will only generally do a few hundred in 1 day. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:33, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreeing that operational considerations like these shouldn't affect the topic structure of the encyclopedia. – Uanfala (talk) 11:38, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While the clean up rate is good, Bray for example had several hundred links, and most were cleared within the day, and at least 30 wikilinks that were pointing to Bray in Ireland and shouldn't have been were correctly changed or left as points to the dab page. The problem I see is that when someone find a page on a watch/edit has a wikilink left to a dab page possibly tagged with a dn template then they are left trying to resolve what is going on. In general the move actioner or move proposer or is likely responsible for fixing the links and if the latter it might be useful if they confirmed they would correct the links in a few days (but anyone is welcome to assist) following the move and also confirmed this had been done. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:09, 6 August 2018 (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.