From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Requested move[edit]

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: moved to "Isco". DrKiernan (talk) 15:42, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Francisco Román AlarcónIsco (footballer) – According to WP:UCN-- (talk) 18:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Support We curiously seem to ignore common-name policies when it comes to the naming of Spanish, Portuguese, and Brazilian footballers, even when they're almost always referred to by their mononyms in reliable sources. There's virtually no chance of finding such articles without navigating some disambiguation pages. Actually, I think it would be fair to move this to Isco. All other uses are acronyms at ISCO, which could remain a disambiguation page. This article could have a hatnote: "This article is about the Spanish footballer. For other uses, see ISCO." --BDD (talk) 19:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Support Isco, per BDD. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Now confused, I'm looking at what Bobrayner says below, and I've never seen him get anything wrong yet. But on the other hand I just tested it by creating Isco as a simple redirect to Francisco Román Alarcón, and then searching on it (within wp, not Google) and it came up immediately and went straight to Francisco Román Alarcón. So is or isn't Isco possible on its own?? In ictu oculi (talk) 01:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Support - while I support a move to Isco (footballer) per WP:COMMONNAME, I don't think we should move it to Isco as I think that article titles with or without caps should lead to the same page. Mentoz86 (talk) 12:10, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Support - I think that's fair enough, this guy played in London, and is one of the most promising Spanish youngsters. MYS77 (talk) 00:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I would prefer Isco but my understanding is that we can't simply move to Isco as that's indistinguishable from ISCO when readers try typing it into the search box. Therefore, we have a choice between Isco (footballer) and Francisco Román Alarcón. "Isco (footballer)" doesn't actually pass WP:UCN; readers won't type that string into the search box and it's not used in sources because it includes a bracketed suffix of wikipedia's own invention. Wikipedia:Article titles favours natural disambiguation over such artifices; in this case we have a perfectly good natural disambiguation - his real name. I am very surprised by the suggestion that a name which does not appear in any of the sources is the WP:COMMONNAME. bobrayner (talk) 13:19, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Are you suggesting there aren't other articles with the (footballer) qualifier? --BDD (talk) 15:53, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
No, I'm suggesting that " (footballer)" is not part of his name and is not used by sources, hence it fails the WP:COMMONNAME test completely. bobrayner (talk) 18:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
So you're against the use of qualifiers when another name is available, even when it's not a common name? And what do you mean, a name which does not appear in any of the sources? His FIFA profile is under Isco without a mention of his birth name. His Malaga profile uses both, but lists him "Known as" Isco. --BDD (talk) 19:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
I shouldn't have to remind you of this, but the proposal is to move this article to "Isco (footballer)". No source uses "Isco (footballer)". Go on, have a look at what the sources call him. None of them use the name "Isco (footballer)". It's very simple. Therefore, Isco (footballer) fails WP:COMMONNAME, and readers are highly unlikely to search for it (because readers are usually familiar with real-world usage, but not with wikipedia's internal norms). That is why I object to "Isco (footballer)". Our goal should be to have article titles which serve readers, rather than neatly lining up lots of different titles with identical suffixes of our own invention. If "Isco" alone were technically possible - without running into ISCO - that would be fine. bobrayner (talk) 21:33, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
It's difficult for me to see this as anything but a philosophical argument against qualifiers in general. You really think this guy's first name, middle name, and first family name together constitute his common name? He's known professionally by a mononym. Should Adele (singer) be moved to Adele Laurie Blue Adkins? --BDD (talk) 00:42, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
His full name is more common than "Isco (footballer)". (The argument against qualifiers isn't so much "philosophical" as it is a tenet of WP:AT). I agree that the mononym is more widely used; if we could have "Isco" that would be even better, but my understanding from Mentoz86 was that it's not possible due to the existence of ISCO. Seriously, if "Isco" is viable, somebody say so; it'll end all this hot air and give us something to agree on :-) bobrayner (talk) 02:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Isco is possible on its own. Compare to Asr, which has a simple hatnote to ASR (all other uses are acronyms or initialisms). I don't think you could call Asr a primary topic, but in both the Wikipedia search box and my Firefox plugin, typing "Asr" and "ASR" each direct you to the right article; there's no conflict. So there shouldn't be a problem with moving this article to Isco; users looking for acronyms or initialisms will probably type "ISCO" anyway. --BDD (talk) 23:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
    Isco sounds good to me, then. (A hatnote pointing to ISCO would probably be helpful, though) bobrayner (talk) 20:54, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
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.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Isco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)