This disambiguation 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.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles
Requested move
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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.
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with*'''Support'''or*'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with~~~~. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.
Oppose - no convincing reason for the change. Looking at the edit histories for some of the articles, we see:
There is not a huge disparity in frequency of edits between these articles; while there has been an increase at the Liverpool article recently, it is not sufficient to warrant that article taking precedence over the other ones. As well, a Google search on the name has hits for the saxophonist and a track star first. --Ckatzchatspy 00:49, 24 July 2007 (UTC)reply
The Liverpool player is the most famous of the Tommy Smiths, but not by enough to justify having him as THE Tommy Smith (and I take offence at Watford nonentity!). Also, can we move the footballers back to "born 45" and "born 80", enyclopedically they make far more senese.
HornetMike 01:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Agree with
HornetMike about sorting the footballers out using years of birth, preferably after a dab page has been set which explains where all the Tommy Smiths are,
WikiGull 08:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)reply
That was my idea at first on my talk page which seemed pretty much dismissed! Seems the most fair and right way for it to be done.
Mattythewhite 08:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Oppose there are simply too many uses to establish a primary usage.
Vegaswikian 07:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Leave it as it is. Let's not start an endless discussion about who is the best known of these. With this many Tommy Smiths, a disambiguation page is appropriate. ●
DanMS •
Talk 22:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Oppose per
WP:DAB, etc. This Tommy Smith is not so overwhelmingly well known that
Tommy Smith should not remain a dab page. — SMcCandlish [
talk] [
cont] ‹(-¿-)›
Oppose. I'd even suggest that
Tommy J. Smith might be a more common meaning of Tommy Smith... within his field, he was far more notable. Leave Tommy Smith as a disambig.
Andrewa 15:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Oppose, as a pair of common English names, there are likely to be more notables in future-assigning the primary to one is vanity.
Chris 01:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Discussion
Any additional comments:
I don't support disambiguating players according to their current team. Players are known to change team with notable frequency, so they should be disambiguated by birth year rather than the club they are playing for. --
Angelo 19:17, 24 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Users are free to move articles. Is there a standard for these players concerning disambiguation?
Vegaswikian 20:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Agree that disambiguating by the current team seems pretty silly during their playing careers, and it won't work for all players after retirement either. Year of birth might be a possibility. How exactly would it be implemented?
Andrewa 15:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)reply
You could check to see if there is a wiki project in this area and ask there. Or look in the categories to see what other articles have done. You could simply announce your intention on the article talk page with your reason. If no serious objections go ahead and make the move. If the proposed target already exists, you would have to come back here. They should all be uncontested moves so the shorter process would apply.
Vegaswikian 20:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.
It was
requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --
Stemonitis 06:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)reply