Talk:Southwest (disambiguation)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Disambiguation
WikiProject icon This 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.
 

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Southeast which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Requesting a 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: No move. Cúchullain t/c 20:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)



Southwest (disambiguation)Southwest – There is no primary topic for Southwest. The direction is notable, I guess, but most people who type in "southwest" are not looking for the ordinal direction--seriously, what could possibly lead to someone typing in "southwest" if they're looking for boxing the compass, which is where Southwest currently redirects. I almost would make the case that Southwest Airlines is the primary topic, as it's a very important airline and probably the most common usage of the term, but there's no way; there are too many other probable results on this page. Note that Southwest airlines has far more pageviews than boxing the compass. There is clearly no primary topic. --Relisted. -- tariqabjotu 03:10, 21 September 2013 (UTC) Red Slash 19:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Support – the current implication of primarytopic being Boxing the compass does seem absurd. No primary topic is a better choice. Dicklyon (talk) 03:30, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
@Dicklyon: please note Talk:Boxing the compass and below. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:34, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Oppose. As noted in the related discussions, the named compass points are the primary topic for their names. 168.12.253.66 (talk) 19:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Do you mean oppose? -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:45, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I intended, I just got my vote backward. I've changed it above. 168.12.253.66 (talk) 14:44, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Of course there's a primary topic for Southwest. It's the compass direction. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:45, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
    • With all due respect, Necrothesp, there is no article about the compass direction and likely never could be. Which article in particular should "southwest" get you to, if not the disambiguation page? Red Slash 02:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose simply because this is a disambiguation page. Mabuska (talk) 21:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment. As I noted in the move review: "I am not convinced that the number of people looking at the Southwest Airlines page indicates that this is the primary meaning of Southwest, any more than the number of people looking at Sears Tower would indicate that this was the primary meaning of Sears". I would further note that the airline is named Southwest in order to invoke the connection with the compass direction. bd2412 T 19:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Actually, it is named after the American Southwest, and is not invoking a direction - which makes sense, because most people like to use an airline that can do multiple directions. smile Red Slash 02:13, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
      • The American Southwest is so named because, relative to the bulk of the country, it is toward the South and toward the West. That is the case for any country or region's Southwest - Southwest Australia, Southwest Asia, Southwest Europe, Southwest Florida. When we see "Southwest" as an identifier, we know what to expect. bd2412 T 02:15, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
        • Because a use is derivative of another sense of a term does not mean that other sense is primary. I challenge anyone to come up with plausible scenarios in which most readers searching for "southwest" are looking for information on the direction rather than any of several things known as southwest. olderwiser 03:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
          • I can recall having fixed links to "Southwest" along the lines of "The stadium is in the southwest part of town", or "the street runs from northeast to southwest". bd2412 T 12:49, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
            • Yes, it's not unusual to have to fix links that are made for ordinary words (which are often better served by a link to wiktionary than to an article). You don't mention whether there were links intended for other things besides the direction, which would suggest a disambiguation page is more appropriate. olderwiser 12:59, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
              • If there were, they didn't stick in my mind. bd2412 T 13:29, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
                • Fair enough, but editors WP:OVERLINKING common words still is not a very strong indication of a primary topic, IMO. olderwiser 14:17, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. I find it a very dubious proposition that readers are more likely to want information about the direction than about an entity with the name. olderwiser 02:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Obviously, this is a disamb page. Incidentally, I doubt if anyone outside the US has ever heard of Southwest Airlines - that is clearly not a primary topic. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:58, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm (belatedly) starting to understand what you're saying. The problem may be that your reasoning for the move is poorly written, especially drawing in irrelevancies like Southwest Airlines. If I were you I'd start again with a clearer explanation of why you think this change would help readers. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support – no good case has been made for a primarytopic for this ambiguous term. Dicklyon (talk) 06:58, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
@Dicklyon: You already voted above. -- tariqabjotu 03:10, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The primary topic is the compass point, by reason of overwhelming significance. But as this is a redir to section, we do need a hatnote on the section (and it's there but could be tidied a bit). Andrewa (talk) 15:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Southwest (disambiguation) is the best landing page for such an unrefined, unclear, request for "southwest". Southwest (disambiguation) provides a clear prominent link to Wiktionary, which gives the primary meaning. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:23, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Comment: Isn't red equally unrefined, unclear? See red (disambiguation). The same question applies to many of the other support rationales above, for example this ambiguous term. We have lots of other ambiguous terms, but not all DABs are at the undisambiguated name, obviously. So what is the term ambiguous doing in this sentence? Answer: It's pure rhetoric. Andrewa (talk) 15:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
      • Well, a BIG difference is that there is actually something interesting and encyclopedic to say about the color red. The sum total of what there is to say about the direction is that it is midway between South and West. olderwiser 20:01, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
        • Some of that is true, but some is opinion and bad guesswork. What is interesting? I was interested to find that southwest is one of the principal winds, and that information is in my opinion encyclopedic whether you find it interesting or not. But what we need is to focus on real issues such as that, rather than using rhetoric to try to boost particular arguments which we personally like. That's the point I was making. I won't be closing this RM of course, but when I try to close a long RM my first pass simply skips all arguments that use emotive language. This works extremely well 90% of the time. The danger, of course, is having made a provisional judgement, it's important to then have a look at the other arguments and see whether there are valid points mixed in with the rhetoric, and tempting not to even do that, and I'm sure I'm not the only admin who feels this temptation! The story of the preacher who wrote on the margin of his sermon notes logic weak at this point, speak a bit more forcefully explains why this does mostly work. Andrewa (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
          • So consider someone searching for "southwest" -- do you seriously think they are more likely looking for something named "Southwest" or for information pertaining to the common word? Yes, there are some interesting things associated with the direction, though these seem mostly tangential details and not indicative of a primary topic olderwiser 13:44, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support I see a lot of claims that the direction is primary topic, but so far I haven't seen a shred of evidence for this claim. Have I overlooked something? --BDD (talk) 16:14, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Long-term significance, as with Apple and Avatar. bd2412 T 16:23, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Those would be better examples if they were items mentioned at, say, List of fruits or List of concepts in Hinduism, instead of standalone articles. In title discussions, it's fair to give titles precedence (cf. Larry the Lobster). "Long-term significance" here seems to amount to promoting a WP:DICDEF. Very few readers typing "Southwest" into a search box will be unaware that southwest is a direction between south and west. The redirection feels condescending. --BDD (talk) 19:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Per Bkonrad above, it is "a very dubious proposition that readers are more likely to want information about the direction than about an entity with the name." Theoldsparkle (talk) 18:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support The primary topic is discussed in the most detail at Wiktionary, which is linked from Southwest (disambiguation). Should Southwest (direction) link to Cardinal direction#Additional points or Points of the compass#Compass point names? Neither seems to keep on-topic, as each quickly veers off to discussing tangential topics like northeast and northwest. Someone looking for southwest presumably isn't interested in northwest (if they were, they would more likely search for compass points. If we want to have our own dictionary entry like the German Wikipedia (de:Südwest) then I suppose we could move to that. Wbm1058 (talk) 04:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose Although I'm tempted to say that the primary has not been justified originally, the other three SE, NE, NW also redirect to the points of the compass so that would be the obvious default per those. Of course if there was any rival primary topic or strong reason to not use the obvious dictionary definition then it should be made. Sometimes we overlook the obvious thinking it is too obvious. The long-term significance is overwhelming. Ignoring the distraction of Southwest Airlines (global scope of en.WP) and any comments based on boxing the compass should be revisited now it's been renamed. Saying that, up, down, left are DABs, right is a redirect primary. Sets are not a valid argument in themselves (as nameclashes should break them) but they do add to precedent and consistency in WP. Widefox; talk 19:53, 3 October 2013 (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.