Talk:Sasha (name)

Name

I always had the feeling it was an Indian name for some reason...69.192.62.63 21:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well its not an indian name.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.10.199 (talk) 16:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sanskrit suzI & {suzIka} a. splendid, beautiful ; Shisu-naga Shizu/Yue-Zhi/Gucci and later 'Sasha'; related, though not etymologically, to Kashyapa as Guesipe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.66.26 (talk) 21:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. See specific guidance at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people)#Articles combining biographies of several people billinghurst sDrewth 17:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sasha (name) → Sasha — Unnecessary parentheses.|Relisted. billinghurst sDrewth 16:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC) --The Evil IP address (talk) 12:41, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opppose, the disambiguation page at Sasha was improperly merged to the name page. There is a difference in function: disambiguation pages identify articles or topics commonly known by the ambiguous title while name pages may include article content about the name and may also include lists of people who happen to have the name, which are generally considered partial matches for purposes of disambiguation. However, it may be that the name is the primary topic and the disambiguation page should be moved to Sasha (disambiguation). older ≠ wiser 18:03, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there's something at Sasha, and it's not a redirect. 76.66.195.196 (talk) 20:54, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The name is the primary topic. The disambiguation page can be deleted since the only item there that is not a name is Sasha and Zamani which can be noted in a hatnote on the name page. User:Bkonrad mentions that the original dab page was "improperly" merged to the name page but dab pages are not supposed to be lists of names since Wikipedia is not a dictionary or directory. — AjaxSmack 05:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That is not quite an accurate reading of the disambiguation page contents. MOS:DABNAME indicates disambiguation pages ARE supposed to identify persons who are commonly known only by the ambiguous title. Most of the entries on the disambiguation page are known solely as "Sasha". These are distinct from a list of persons who happen to share a particular given name. older ≠ wiser 11:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're right that people who are commonly known only by the ambiguous title are correctly at the dab page. However, since they are all named Sasha, there's no reason the could not be just as easily be (distinctly) disambiguated at the name page maybe with the relatively notable DJ mentioned in a hatnote. — AjaxSmack 01:06, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That blurs the distinction between a disambiguation page and a list of people who happen to share a name but are not commonly known solely by that name. A disambiguation page is to help people find topic with ambiguous titles. If a person is commonly know solely by the name "Sasha", they should be on a disambiguation page along with Sasha and Zamani. older ≠ wiser 04:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure it blurs the distinction but it's a distinction that's not needed in this case. Standardisation only for its own sake or for editor aesthetics isn't always helpful for users. The true disambiguation links can remain in a separate section but having all of those named Sasha in one place reduces the need for users to bounce around several pages. — AjaxSmack 07:26, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why should a user looking for some entity named precisely Sasha be forced to parse a list of partial title matches of people who happen to share the name? How is that helpful? It is not only a matter of standardization or aesthetics, but of utility. Disambiguation pages have a relatively clearly defined purpose. Short lists of people with a name are sometimes tolerated on a disambiguation page, though they are almost always at most partial matches and generally should go to a separate page for the name and leave the disambiguation page to serve the function of helping readers find topics that would otherwise have the same title. older ≠ wiser 11:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Normally I would agree but, in this case, the dab page is barely populated. With only two Sashas there, User:Skinsmoke's concerns noted below warrant consideration of a move. — AjaxSmack 06:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The disambiguation page would be roughly what the page is now. I wouldn't characterize it as "barely populated". older ≠ wiser 11:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Both views on this have some merit. However, if a disambiguation page is retained separate from Sasha (name), it is only a matter of time before people start adding various people called Sasha Smith or Saŝa Ondraćikovinovićski to it, and we will finish up with the same situation we have today. Better to tackle the problem head on, merge the two pages into one, and shift it to Sasha. Skinsmoke (talk) 09:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The solution is not to merge the two pages but to patrol the content of the disambiguation page to assure that random people not generally known only by their first name aren't added. Powers ^T 14:06, 12 July 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.