Talk:Docker (occupation)

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Move, 4 April 2021, see discussion.
Keep, 26 December 2014, see discussion.

This is the talk page of a redirect that has been merged and now targets the page:
• Dockworker
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Dockworker
Merged page edit history is maintained in order to preserve attributions.

Primary topic for Docker

What needs to be done to get this page to point to the Docker software and not Stevedore?

If you Google the word 'Docker' the top entries are all about the Docker software. I really doubt that very many people are typing in Docker in the search box on Wikipedia and wanting to learn about Stevedores.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ HappyCamp23 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 23 December 2014

Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves, and use {{subst:Requested move}} on the Talk:Docker (software) page. You seem to want to move Docker (software) to Docker. Please read Wikipedia:Primary topic for the concept of a primary topic for a term. You will likely need to address concerns about long-term significance of the software, as it has only been around since March 2013. Wbm1058 (talk) 20:55, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 December 2014

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: Part of the discussion moved to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 26#Docker to prevent multiple discussions. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 02:44, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Docker → Docker (software) – I believe that it is highly likely that when someone is searching for the term Docker they are searching for Docker (software) I don't know if there are statistics available to see if when people land on the Stevedore page they than go to the disambiguation page and then go to Docker software??? Not sure if I filled out this information correctly to have the redirect page point to Docker (Software) HappyCamp23 (talk) 21:19, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I momentarily gave you a bad instruction. If you just want to change the redirect, without actually moving the page (something which is occasionally, but not generally, done), see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. But this request is malformed, as we don't move redirects. You should make the move request at Talk:Docker (software). Wbm1058 (talk) 21:31, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 26 § Docker

Support (continued) redirect to stevedore - likewise dockers are not clothing. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support continued redirect to stevedore - You have been told that stevedore is far-and-away what most people are searching for when they look up "docker", and you refuse to accept this. The only evidence you claim is that your search results always turn up the software first (despite being told that search engines generally tailor results to what the querent most often looks for), which was refuted in IRC by someone else doing the search and getting several times more results for stevedores than the software. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 22:04, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Per my earlier advice, a redirect for discussion has been opened here. In fairness, my Google search is dominated by the software and clothing brand, but I'm not Australian or British. – Wbm1058 (talk) 22:26, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Docker (software) will likely be a common subject of discussion for a while, then will become merely yet another software, or will fade out of use. But with widespread containerization in docks, manual dockers and stevedores are far less prominent than of old. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:14, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support redirect to Stevedore. Bleeding obvious, given that "docker" is the common name for someone who loads and unloads ships, in the UK at least, and it's a very big part of our history, no matter that there aren't that many around any more. Even though the two terms are not actually usually synonymous in the UK, the stevedore article describes what they do. Far more notable than the piece of software. -- Necrothesp (talk) 01:04, 29 December 2014 (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.

Redirect to disambiguation page

When analyzing pageviews 20190626-20190716 (using https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews and https://tools.wmflabs.org/redirectviews):

Docker (software) 39,818 views
Millwall F.C. 18,950 views
Stevedore 21,283 views (one day outlier costituting 25% of the views) and 1,804 views comes from the redirect page "Docker"

... it appears that there is no clear primary topic for "Docker" with respect to usage. If there is one, it is "Docker (software)". However, with respect to long-term significance, one could possibly argue "Stevedore" has a greater "enduring notability" (but but necessarily greater "educational value"). I have therefore redirected "Docker" to Docker (disambiguation) per Wikipedia:NOPRIMARYTOPIC. --Bensin (talk) 00:15, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at statistics for the year 2018[1], the numbers are Docker (software): 849,883; Millwall F.C.:495,338; Stevedore 234,355. --Bensin (talk) 00:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Docker should not redirect to Docker (disambiguation) as that creates a WP:MALPLACED disambiguation page. If there is no primary topic, please use WP:RM to move Docker (disambiguation) to the base name. older ≠ wiser 01:18, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As far as long-term significance is concerned, the primary redirect to Stevedore is clearly justified. The dock industry was one of the most important industries in history and the common term for a dockworker in the UK, which had one of the most important such industries, is "docker". Millwall's nickname is derived from this. The software is pure WP:RECENTISM with no long-term significance at all. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, like I said: "one could possibly argue 'Stevedore' has a greater 'enduring notability'". But WP:PRIMARYTOPIC suggests two points to consider. One of them (the first point listed) is that usage is "highly likely—much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined", and that point is not by any standard fulfilled by Stevedore (as both Millwall F.C and Docker (software) has more views by factors 2 and 3 respectively and a combined factor of 5). There is an obvious conflict between the points here and neither "Stevedore", nor any other article, fulfill both these suggested considerations. I would not say that "Docker (software)" fulfills the description of WP:RECENTISM. That article is, as far back as there is data (2015), consistently more viewed than "Stevedore". And even if one successfully argued recentism for "Docker (software)", one can't say that that for "Millwall F.C" (founded 1885). If there is a primary topic for "Docker" it is not "Stevedore". The best target for the term is thus the disambiguation page. --Bensin (talk) 15:12, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will continue to maintain that it should be a primary redirect to Stevedore due to the long-term significance clause. See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 26#Docker. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:17, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't se anybody contesting that Stevedore may have "enduring notability" (the second suggested point), but do you not agree that it completely fails the first point, "usage"? That both the two other articles have a greater claim to being primary topic in that regard. Again, I'm not suggesting redirecting "Docker" to any of those articles, I'm suggesting pointing "Docker" to the disambiguation page (or rather make "Docker" itself into a disambiguation page). None of the three article can lay claim on being primary target because none of them fulfill both points listed above. --Bensin (talk) 20:24, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I don't agree. The dockworker usage is incredibly common, especially in British history (the dockers going on strike frequently dominated the news when I was growing up), and easily the primary topic for the term. Again, we are talking recentism here. Remember, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia in which history is as important as the present, not a modern cultural dictionary. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:52, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Taking about the first of the two points for consideration, "highly likely—much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined", are you saing that "stevedore" has a claim to being primary topic in that specific regard given the statistics I have provided above? --Bensin (talk) 16:43, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm clearly saying that I think it's the primary topic as far as the second point is concerned: "A topic is primary for a term with respect to long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term." -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:47, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but there are two points suggested for consideration when determining WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. You keep addressing the second point, and the second point only. In my previous question I explicitly asked about the first of the two points: "highly likely—much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined". Are you saing that "stevedore" has a claim to being primary topic in that specific regard? --Bensin (talk) 15:14, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's clearly the primary topic as far as long-term significance is concerned. As far as searches are concerned it may not be, but only because of recentism. I don't think Millwall is relevant, as their nickname is the Dockers, plural, not the Docker, singular (Dockers is a separate article). They are also called the Dockers because of Millwall Docks! As to the software, that really is recentism, and also relatively obscure to most people, as opposed to the very common English-language term for a dockworker. So I'm afraid you're not going to convince me that this needs changing. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:25, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Both Docker (software) and Millwall F.C. are linked from Docker (disambiguation) so it makes sense to consider them both when determining if there is a primary topic for the search term "Docker" or not. But even if we only considered "Docker (software)" that article alone would make "Stevedore" fail the first point for consideration. I am not arguing that "Docker (software)" be made primary topic, because I don't disagree with you that that "Stevedore" (and "Millwall F.C.") may have "enduring notability" (the second suggested point). But "Docker (software)" (alone or together with "Millwall F.C.") does make "Stevedore" fail the first point because since at least 2015 they respectively by far outnumber "Stevedore" in number of visits. Therefore, "Stevedore" does not meet both suggested points for being a primary topic as suggested in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It only meets the second. --Bensin (talk) 17:08, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is there now consensus that none of the three articles mentioned above meet both suggested points ("endurability" and "use") in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC? --Bensin (talk) 21:49, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:05, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you think the article "Stevedore" fulfills the second point regarding "endurability". Nobody is contesting that it does so. Are you contesting that "Stevedore" fails the first point, that regarding "use"? --Bensin (talk) 19:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Basically I'm saying this is a pointless discussion. It doesn't have to meet both "suggested points". There is no hard and fast rule. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:48, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says "In a few cases, there is some conflict between a topic of primary usage [...] and one of primary long-term significance [...]. In such a case, consensus may be useful in determining which topic, if any, is the primary topic." So though you may think discussion is pointless, I don't see how we can reach consensus without talk. You have not yet answered my question: Are you contesting that "Stevedore" fails the first point, that regarding "use"? --Bensin (talk) 17:25, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To summarize as I see it: Of the three mentioned articles, the article "stevedore" accounts for a little more than 15% of the page views of the almost 5.9 million views since 1 Juli 2015 (verify this here), and less than 14% of their collective incoming intrawiki links. Both numbers are far from the 50% usually required for a primary topic. "stevedore" therefore fails the point regarding "use" suggested in the guideline WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Nobody seems to contest that. None of the three articles meet both suggested points in the guideline. The proposal is to either point "docker" to "Docker (disambiguation)" or that "Docker (disambiguation)" be moved to "docker". No argument has been presented here suggesting why the guideline should not be applied to this case, or why not both suggested points in the guideline be taken into consideration. It also seems odd to me that the current primary topic is not even an article, but a redirect. --Bensin (talk) 05:56, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bensin, if you think you have a strong case and want greater participation than just yourself and Necrothesp, then you should propose a move at WP:RM. Even if you were to convince Necrothesp, a move would still be necessary. older ≠ wiser 10:00, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bkonrad: Is that the correct forum if we opt to just point "docker" to "Docker (disambiguation)"? The current discussion seems to rather be a disagreement on whether or not "stevedore" is a primary topic. --Bensin (talk) 06:10, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I already said above, Docker should not redirect to Docker (disambiguation) as that creates a WP:MALPLACED disambiguation page. If there is no primary topic, please use WP:RM to move Docker (disambiguation) to the base name. older ≠ wiser 08:12, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT as to why this is perfectly acceptable. We have many such primary redirects, since a topic can only be at one title, but other titles may be equally valid, as here. In this instance, "stevedore" is probably more common worldwide, but "docker" is by far the commonest general term for the occupation in the UK, where a stevedore usually refers to a particular type of dockworker. Trust me, if you were growing up in the UK when I was, unless you lived in a newsless bubble you would have absolutely no doubt that the primary redirect here was the correct one! Hence my point about overwhelming long-term significance, as opposed to a nickname (only ever seen in the plural in any case, so not even relevant to this issue since Dockers already exists as a separate article) and a piece of computer jargon only familiar to people in the field. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:19, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sure! The redirect may not be as odd as I thought. Would you also care to address the main argument of my post? Do you think 15% use is sufficient to be a primary topic? Or is your stance that both suggested points in the guideline are not applicable to this case? --Bensin (talk) 06:24, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to rehash what I've already said in great detail above. Either start an RM or don't. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:38, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Necrothesp: @Bkonrad: I have now added my proposal here. --Bensin (talk) 06:26, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Docker (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:46, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted redirect of “Docker” to “stevedore”

A Google search for “Docker” results in all search results having to do with the OS virtualization software and none referring to a dockworker or stevedore. Anyone explicitly searching for “Docker” with a capital “D” almost certainly is looking for Docker (software). I reverted the edit, resulting in “docker” being a disambiguation page whose first link does go to “stevedore” but also provides a link to Docker (software).

I know that in the U. K. “docker” is a synonym for “dockworker”; however, “dockworker” is already a redirect to stevedore, and in any event this should reflect a global perspective and not terms primarily specific to the U. K. IMHO (let alone that any Web search for “Docker” returns results for the software in all the top results). —PowerPCG5 (talk) 02:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PowerPCG5 This has been proposed before and did not gain consensus. Please review the previous move discussions and if you believe consensus has changes, please begin a new WP:RM to establish that. And in any case, you should not implement this with a cut and paste move. 03:11, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks; will do! And thanks for the link to the cut and paste policy; was not aware of that page. —PowerPCG5 (talk) 03:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PowerPCG5 There's some instructions at WP:RM about starting a move discussion, and a template that gets it included in the listing of current discussions. Also, please pick one talk page to host the discussion so it is not split between this page and Talk:Docker (disambiguation). Actually, if you follow the instructions, a bot will automatically place notifications on the affected pages. older ≠ wiser 03:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about the template! I don’t spend a lot of time editing Wikipedia and was not aware of that. Also sorry about the duplicate discussion; considered deleting one of them but was afraid it might be unethical to delete it after the fact after it’s already been archived and/or timestamped. —PowerPCG5 (talk) 03:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move of Docker (disambiguation) to docker

A Google search for “Docker” results in all the results on the first several pages referring to Docker (software) and none referring to a stevedore. This may be a reflection of Docker having become significantly common a technology over the last few years since the previous move proposals above as far as I can tell. A user explicitly searching for “Docker” with a capital ”D” is almost certainly looking for the OS virtualization software. Suggest making Docker the disambiguation page for “docker” so that users searching for “Docker” can immediately find the link to the software. Note that “dockworker,” which is a more common term than “docker” as far as I can tell, already redirects to stevedore. —PowerPCG5 (talk) 03:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Temporarily changing redirect from Docker to docker (disambiguation) until this is resolved since there is no consensus that stevedore is the more appropriate redirect target for Docker than Docker (software) until the proposed move is resolved to address WP:MALPLACED —PowerPCG5 (talk) 05:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus at Talk:Docker (disambiguation)#Requested move 13 August 2019 was that stevadore should be the primary redirect – Thjarkur (talk) 07:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Docker (software) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:19, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]