Talk:Away team

Requested move 24 January 2015

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: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:59, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(I history-merged the old page Away team (except its last 4 edits, which were all redirects) to Away team (Star Trek term). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Away team (disambiguation) → Away team – Away team (without "disambiguation") is the correct target. For some strange reason that I cannot figure out, an editor had redirected the title to Star Trek: Away Team. That is most certainly not the primary target for the term. This problem had been raised on the talk page in the past with no response. There is no primary topic, as away mission is another synonym that was mistakenly redirected. What links here is pretty clear on this ( [1], [2], [3]) so this is really routine housekeeping that somebody screwed up. Viriditas (talk) 02:12, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support and beam up a trout for the Trekkie fan. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:14, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support the videogame isn't even the primary meaning in Star Trek or videogames. --- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 09:37, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support No clear primary topic, so the disambig page should be at the undisambiguated title per WP:MALPLACED. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:04, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support, clear lack of a primary topic (and certainly the Star Trek target is not primary). bd2412 T 19:54, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am a Trekkie fan, and even I support this. The immediate primary reference for me would be a sports reference. Miyagawa (talk) 20:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't even think the video game is the primary meaning for Star Trek let alone in general.--65.94.255.73 (talk) 20:48, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support. No clear primary. Melonkelon (talk) 22:37, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is the result of someone unilaterally deleting an article that used to reside at Away team and redirecting it to something with a similar name. I'm half tempted to just restore the original since it had survived an AfD previously. —Xezbeth (talk) 14:07, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Of course NE Ent 13:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

The discussion above is sufficiently close to snow close to rewrite the page with the sports team being primary meaning. NE Ent 13:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Err, if closed as proposed, there is no primary topic. Until the page is actually moved, please leave it in conformance with guidelines for a disambiguation page with an existing primary topic.older ≠ wiser 13:20, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's entirely incorrect for several reasons: 1) the existing primary topic was never supported by any argument or evidence. It was made by a user for no good reason, and that user has now recanted their decision 2) if something is inaccurate, the policies dictate and support fixing and correcting that inaccuracy immediately. No dab naming guideline trumps this priority. Without a rationale for the existing, incorrect primary topic, it is therefore appropriate to correct it. Enforcing bureaucratic guidelines when a) nobody actually supports the outcome, and b) restores an error, is the reason IAR exists. In other words, we do not have to wait for any bureaucratic naming process to conclude to fix a problem. To summarize, process is important, but process does not trump accuracy or the needs of our readers. Your argument implies that a malformed dab title takes precedence over erroneous content, which is exactly backwards. Malformed titles take a backseat to content, which always takes precedence. Otherwise, you would be fallaciously promoting form over content, which isn't a valid argument in a text based environment. I will illustrate with an example: our editors are trying to find the right topic. If a redirect takes them to the wrong topic, then we fix this problem. Our readers don't care one whit whether our dab pages are named correctly, nor would it matter. Viriditas (talk) 06:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Away team sports meaning is a primary definition -- best left to Wiktionary -- so we're not going to have a "primary topic" (article). That doesn't mean we don't list the primary mean first. NE Ent 15:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but your edit placed entry for road (sports) as if it were the primsry topic. That's not what was proposed. older ≠ wiser 15:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Bkonrad, and have to further observe that we do not use Wiktionary as a source, per WP:USERG. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 07:24, 31 January 2015 (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.