Talk:Alishan

Requested move 10 July 2018

The following is a closed 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: consensus to move the disambiguation page to Alishan at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 18:01, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alishan (disambiguation) → Alishan – Procedural request on behalf of Amys eye, whose comment from Talk:Alishan National Scenic Area I transferred below: No such user (talk) 09:19, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This a request to change a page's redirect NOT a move, but this process was requested by another editor. "Alishan" currently redirects to Alishan National Scenic Area, a small tourist park within a larger mountain range, itself within a county of the same name. It is proposed that this redirect be altered to reach the disambiguation page, as not only is the park not necessarily the primary topic, but also someone searching for "Alishan" is equally likely (possibly more so) to be searching for the mountain range or administrative county.
— Amys eye

Support. The move as proposed would reverse and overwrite 12:39, 25 October 2009‎ WikiLaurent (talk | contribs | block)‎ . . (38 bytes) (+38)‎ . . (moved Alishan to Alishan (disambiguation): Renamed to "Alishan (disambiguation)" to make room for primary topic) which appears undiscussed and unjustified. Andrewa (talk) 18:12, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm dropping in from Wikiproject Disambiguation, and I'm horrendously confused as to what exactly is going on:
1. There was a move in this diff many years ago?
2. And so there was a move request on the page that you linked above (Talk:Alishan National Scenic Area)?

(cont) I know it's not generally kosher to edit others' comments on talk pages, but based off that interpretation, I've reformatted the original request into {{quote}}. Hopefully that's not contentious and makes it easier to figure out what's happening, exactly. Techhead7890 (talk) 08:00, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's the way to go. The request is basically to acknowledge that there's no primary topic, but to action it as originally requested would violate policy, see #Discussion. Your edit does not misquote anyone, so I think it's fine. Andrewa (talk) 10:39, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- Oppose After consideration, based on the request by Amys eye, they are simply asking for the redirect to be changed to land on the disambiguation instead of heading directly to ANSA (Alishan National Scenic Area). Based on what Amys said, it seems reasonable and fairly simple to do. I don't think that moving about the pages about and changing titles would be helpful. Very few disambiguation pages exist without (disambiguation) in their page name. I think it's better to leave the disambiguation page as-is. (I instead propose that we simply fix the redirect target as requested) Techhead7890 (talk) 10:19, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per andrewa (discussed in full below): the original Amys proposal I had first supported, which involved a redirect, would be a more complicated way of implementing the proposal being discussed. Moving would be simpler, and it complies with established policy while having the same results as intended. Techhead7890 (talk) 01:42, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support on the grounds that there is no clear primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

From above Very few disambiguation pages exist without (disambiguation) in their page name. Not true, they should exist whenever there is no primary topic, see the policy at Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Naming the disambiguation page The title of a disambiguation page is the ambiguous term itself, provided there is no primary topic for that term. If there is a primary topic, then the tag "(disambiguation)" is added to the name of the disambiguation page... (my emphasis). That says (perhaps not as clearly as it might) that if there is no primary topic, as seems to be the case here, then the DAB should be at the base name. Andrewa (talk) 10:43, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrewa: Hi, saw your message on my talk. That seems to be fair enough – I did note that a few existed (eg Tissue; where between the biological and commercial variants is without a primary topic). I also suppose the Amys proposal I was in favour of (changing the redirect) is essentially a (needlessly) more complicated way of implementing the same result of arriving at the disambiguation. As well as that, as you say the page name change wouldn't be/isn't as relevant as I first believed. I'll amend my opposition to supporting in that case. Thanks for taking the time to explain the naming policy in detail. Techhead7890 (talk) 01:34, 19 July 2018 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.