Talk:Dasher

Is there a primary topic?

I question whether the software should be considered the primary topic. Before I heard of it, I had always thought of the main meaning as one of Santa's reindeer. Should I request a move of that article to "Dasher (software)" and this disambiguation page to "Dasher"? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 05:51, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. –Quiddity (talk) 23:56, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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: pages moved. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:26, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dasher (disambiguation) → Dasher
Dasher → Dasher (software)

– Concern has been expressed whether the software is appropriate to be considered a primary topic, given (for example) that Santa's reindeer are better known. SoledadKabocha (talk) 18:37, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support; I don't see a strong case for primary topic here. Powers ^T 22:20, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support if anything it would be the fictional reindeer -- 70.24.248.246 (talk) 06:48, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I would have thought the reindeer too. bd2412 T 13:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Nothing to indicate that software is Primary. Note that if the move fails, the dab page needs reformatting for case where there exists a primary usage. PamD 17:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As above, I see no reason why the software should be a primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pile-on support; the software is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. bobrayner (talk) 12:20, 4 January 2013 (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.

However, it cases like this that hijack an article's title for something else, the move is not complete without someone patching up the links that are thereby broken. See many links at Special:WhatLinksHere/Dasher that refer to the software, implying a bunch of bad links that now need fixing. The proposer or mover should generally commit to such fixes before a move is allowed. Dicklyon (talk) 18:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not necessary that all improvements to the encyclopedia be made before any improvement to the encyclopedia can be made. The move requires the mop; updating the links does not; requiring the mop-holder to do the rest of the work would just mean a larger backlog of mop-requiring tasks. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying anyone is required to do it. Just that doing the move without someone committed to cleaning up the resulting breakage is probably not progress. One reason I opposed primarytopic claims when they're at all questionable is that it's so hard to cleanly back them out in situations like this. Dicklyon (talk) 18:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]