- Mike Johnson (politician) (talk|edit|history|logs|links|archive|watch) (RM) (Discussion with closer)
I was the original nominator to move this page from Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) to simply Mike Johnson. I feel fairly strongly that the support was there to change the name without including the (politician) disambiguator. MJL was very helpful in explaining his their rationale, but I still disagree with the decision so would like it reviewed. Cpotisch (talk) 23:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Overturn
You can't WP:BARTENDER your way into a WP:PDAB - partial disambiguation is an unusual phenomenon that should require explicit consensus in favor of its implementation, not one that emerges from nothing. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
* Pppery * it has begun... 04:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse (involved) - WP:NOTAVOTE. A large chunk of the "support" !votes were qualified as Major politician within US politics, as he is second in line to the presidency, and other comments with that same spirit. Said comments, and the !votes that come with them have no policy base and thus should be weighted accordingly.
- Also the nom's rationale for this MR is completely against the purpose of MR. It is explicitly stated in #What this process is not Do not request a move review simply because you disagree with the outcome of a page move discussion. estar8806 (talk) ★ 18:41, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- You are completely misinterpreting what this process is not. If you read the full section, that sentence is quite clearly stating that you can't start an MR because you disagree with the outcome of the discussion, not the judgment made by the closer. The entire point of an MR is to take a look if the closer made a potentially-incorrect decision. Cpotisch (talk) 19:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The quote is Do not request a move review simply because you disagree with the outcome.... You wrote ...I still disagree with the decision... (emphasis my own). That's essentially the same idea. Nonetheless, the other part of your statement is policy based so my point is just to mention it. estar8806 (talk) ★ 23:51, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- "Outcome" means a different thing than "decision". Cpotisch (talk) 02:57, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn Relist Overturn per Pppery, mainly per WP:BARTENDER. Steel1943 (talk) 00:56, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I just realized that Pppery's comment did not specify a specific alternative action, which means the default in lieu of "endorse" is "relist". And turns out that is what I meant: I have an idea how the close should have been performed instead, but I'm WP:INVOLVED in the discussion, so a relist may be safer. Steel1943 (talk) 18:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Change to "Overturn": Per my interpretation of the discussion, the disambigator in the new title should have contained the word "speaker" somewhere to allow disambigator precision to avoid ambiguity. Steel1943 (talk) 23:47, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse. <uninvolved> The RM is already a long survey with good participation. Relisting won't make a difference. The close is reasonable and in accord with WP:RMCI. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 23:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Partially endorse (involved). Clearly no consensus to move to the proposed title but should have been left at Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician). No consensus to move at all and the move which happened is clearly incomplete disambiguation. Most of the support arguments boiled down to "he's the Speaker so of course he's the primary topic", which is not policy. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:35, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Overturn, uninvolved. I don't see a lot of discussion concerning the PDAB question here, so the close seems to be a bit out of the blue. There are a number of politicians named Mike/Michael Johnson, making the title confusingly ambiguous. 162 etc. (talk) 22:06, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Due to inactivity, tagging @ScottishFinnishRadish: for thoughts. Cpotisch (talk) 17:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't have strong feelings one way or another about page titles in general, and I'm not really up to snuff on the ephemera of move reviews so I don't really have any constructive input here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse The PDAB argument was raised by participants, and both supporters and opposers of the PTOPIC proposal supported it as an alternative to the status quo or the primary topic. Very reasonable and well-explained close. Iffy★Chat -- 18:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I'm involved for the obvious reasons. At this point, it might just be easier to do another RM to suggest an alternate disambiguation (ie. "speaker"). Relisting the original discussion at this point would clearly not be helpful, and there's clearly no consensus here whether to endorse or overturn my close. Even if consensus here was to overturn, then it isn't clear what it should be overturned to be.
It's been almost a month, and there's where I am at. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 19:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I should probably also repeat "Mike Johnson (politician)" was most people's prefered alternate disambiguator. I saw there was weak consensus for WP:NOTCURRENTTITLE, and I felt there was small consensus for what that title should be (arguably there was no consensus, but I disagree). That's why I went with the one I did. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 19:53, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
|
