Jump to content

Talk:Docker

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Dockers)

Redirect discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a redirect discussion in progress on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 26 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Wbm1058 (talk) 17:57, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Discussion Result

[edit]

The redirect discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 26 has been closed by an interested party with the amusing result that a search for Docker will whisk users to Stevedore... as if that's the only meaning of the word and there are no other meanings. So, Wikipedia remains in contravention of more than a hundred years of precedent set by hardcopy encyclopedias and dictionaries. IMHO there is no case of multiple uses where only one should rule. Disambig should be the rule, not the exception, as determined by much wiser minds so long ago. 98.247.200.181 (talk) 22:11, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Now there is a related discussion at Talk:Dockers; a request to move the men's clothing brand to Dockers (brand). – Wbm1058 (talk) 17:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 March 2015

[edit]
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: No move. Cúchullain t/c 18:30, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Docker (disambiguation) → Docker – Currently Docker redirects to Stevedore. There is however a lengthy disambiguation page at Docker (disambiguation). There is no primary article at Docker, so according to WP:DABNAME the disambiguation page should be Docker not Docker (disambiguation). 128.205.39.37 (talk) 02:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion that arrived at a consensus to keep Docker as a redirect to Stevedore was closed just a little over two months ago. I suggest that if the if the proposer wants propose a move that will essentially overturn this recent consensus they will need a better reason than the dab page is large.--66.130.191.63 (talk) 15:36, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The length of the disambiguation page is not my argument.WP:DABNAME says: "The title of a disambiguation page is the ambiguous term itself, provided there is no primary topic for that term." The ambiguous term is "docker", and given that Docker is a redirect to an article about another term, I'd say it does not represent the primary topic for the term "docker". Also, the discussion you're referencing was about moving Docker (software) to Docker, and the consensus was to not do that. I'm opening a new discussion about moving Docker (disambiguation) to Docker, which I think there is a better case for. 128.205.39.37 (talk) 16:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's a nonsequitar. A redirect can represent a primary topic. Just look at USA, which is a redirect, even though we have other topics called "USA", just look at the disambiguation page USA (disambiguation). It doesn't matter if the page is a redirect, it doesn't matter if a disambiguation page exists if there is a Ptopic, which there is, per the discussion at RfD. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
USA redirecting to United States of America makes sense. Most people searching "USA" want United States of America. Note however that America is a DAB because you can't assume most people searching for "America" want United States of America. "Docker" might be synonymous with "stevedore", but there are a lot of things which are "dockers" but aren't "stevedores", hence the existence of Docker (disambiguation) in the first place. The question then is: do people searching for "docker" usually want to find stevedores or are they usually looking for something else? Maybe a few years ago you could argue they'd want stevedore, but that is changing with the rising popularity of Docker (software). 128.205.39.37 (talk) 23:09, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That has already been established at RFD. The primary topic of "docker" is "stevedore" per the discussion at RfD. The RfD wasn't years ago, it was recently. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 03:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion at RfD established that Docker (software) should not be moved to Docker. Not that Docker (disambiguation) should not be moved to Docker, nor that Docker should redirect to Stevedore. 128.205.39.37 (talk) 01:27, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You should read the discussion again, and the outcome. The outcome did not change the target of the redirect to something else, which is possible, since it is a discussion on the usage of the redirect. RfD outcomes have a range of possibilities, not just those explicitly desired by the nomination. The RfD reaffirmed the target of the redirect is stevedore, therefore it is the primary topic. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:56, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, the decision was to not change Docker (software) to the primary topic. Not the same as affirming stevedore as the primary topic. 128.205.39.37 (talk) 23:05, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_December_26 did not confirm that Stevedore should be the primary topic. All it did was reject making Docker (software) the primary topic. There was discussion there on doing the action which is proposed here. HappyCamp23 (talk) 05:48, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it is done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus." Additionally, the only participants in the previous discussion that are not in the current discussion are people who suggested opening a request to move Docker (disambiguation) to Docker, i.e. people who would support this proposition. Goodness, wouldn't I certainly be a canvasser then if I pulled them in here, per your suggestion? 128.205.39.37 (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Clear primary topic, given that "docker" is the common term for those who load and unload ships in what was until fairly recently the world's foremost maritime nation. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's only a clear primary topic if "docker" should be assumed to nearly always mean "dockworker". Maybe it does to you because that's what it means in your field of interest, but in other fields it has other meanings. The question is how often do people searching "docker" want stevedore vs. something else? 128.205.39.37 (talk) 23:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It does nearly always mean dockworker and has done for centuries. That is not going to be changed any time soon by a piece of software. See WP:RECENTISM. You seem to be a bit of an advocate for the software. Are you connected with it, by any chance? -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not connected to Docker, and in fact I came to Wikipedia to learn more about it and was taken to an article about an unfamiliar term (stevedore). I am interested in computer technology (like you are interested in England), so no doubt there are biases in this discussion, but I don't have anything to gain financially in this. As for your other point, see Python. 128.205.39.37 (talk) 01:13, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why would I want to see Python? Are you suggesting that this proves that a clearly primary topic isn't always primary? It doesn't prove anything other than WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. For the record, I agree that the snake should be the primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:01, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The reason Python is a DAB is because "a piece of software" became sufficiently popular as to warrant disambiguation of the term, if you read the talk page. I'm just saying this wouldn't be the first time it's happened. 128.205.39.37 (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you think the page was moved just because of the programming language I think you probably need to reread the talkpage. The programming language wasn't even mentioned by the editor who moved it. It was mentioned later by someone who said it should be the primary topic and was disagreed with. There are a number of well-known meanings of Python. There aren't that many well-known meanings of docker. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:44, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To quote the mover (the very first comment) on Talk:Python, "I moved Python (disambiguation) to Python ... A large number of the python links were about the language." And I don't think he means parceltongue. Anyway, we're digressing. It's been noted that Docker (software) gets 3 times as many views as Stevedore, and many Stevedore views likely come from the Docker redirect. Makes sense, because it's doubtful people come to WP to learn about stevedores, whereas people might come to learn about Docker (software) because LXCs (which include Docker) are trending in the tech industry. I agree that "a docker" will probably always be a dockworker. But judging by usage metrics the meaning of standalone "Docker" is ambiguous. 128.205.39.37 (talk) 20:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Page views for stevedore from the redirect are not included in view statistics for that page. The statistics are tracked by the URL and the stats for redirect are separate from the target page. older ≠ wiser 20:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On the subject of usage metrics, "docker linux" has 3,450,000 results on Google, and "docker ship" has only 381,000 results. A lot of the results for "docker ship" include phrases like "shipping applications with Docker", so even "docker ship" yields a lot of pages about Docker (the software). It's very hard to actually only search for "docker" in the sense of dockworker, because there are so many pages about Docker (the software) using maritime terms. 128.205.39.37 (talk) 23:20, 5 March 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.

Requested move 13 August 2019

[edit]
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus is to retain Docker as a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Stevedore. Colin M explains one reason why: "That way 99.9% of readers will get to their target with no more than 1 extra click, and some will be taken straight to their intended destination". (non-admin closure) В²C ☎ 00:43, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Docker (disambiguation) → Docker – This is primarily a question of whether or not there exists a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "Docker". Currently "Docker" is a redirect pointing to the article "Stevedore". My proposal is to move "Docker (disambiguation)" to "Docker" since no article meet both suggested points for consideration in the guideline WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Looking at the three articles Docker (software), Millwall F.C. and Stevedore, the article "Stevedore" may have "enduring notability" but accounts for only a little more than 15% of the page views of the almost 5.9 million views since 1 Juli 2015 (verify this here), and less than 14% of their collective incoming intrawiki links. Both numbers are far from the 50% usually required for a primary topic. "stevedore" therefore fails the point regarding "use" suggested in the guideline WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. None of the three articles meet both suggested points in the guideline and according to the guideline "If no primary topic exists, then the term should be the title of a disambiguation page". There is no obvious reason why the guideline to determine WP:PRIMARYTOPIC should not be applied to this case, or why not both suggested points in the guideline be taken into consideration. Bensin (talk) 06:21, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak support while the laborer is clearly primary by PT#2, the software and FC are likely (if anything) primary by PT#1 and there are a number of other uses on the DAB page such as a film and 2 places. Also note that views for "Stevedore" include views for the term "Stevedore" and other terms that people from Google come. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:30, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose. Docker should remain a primary redirect to Stevedore. "Docker" is by far the commonest term for a dockworker in the United Kingdom (far commoner than "stevedore", which generally denotes a more specialised trade in the UK), and was for centuries one of the most important occupations in a country well-known for its sea trade. For most of the 20th century, the subject of dockers and their strikes and pay claims was rarely out of the news. In terms of long-term significance it clearly trumps any other usage of the term. The other proposed 'contenders' mentioned above are a piece of computer jargon only familiar to those in the field (and see WP:RECENTISM) and a nickname (only ever used in the plural) for a football club which is in fact derived from its location near London Docks. Neither is a genuine contender. There is no contest here for primary topic. Sometimes common sense has to prevail over pageview quoting. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:32, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RECENTISM talks about "recent events", "breaking news", "news spikes", "day-by-day facts" and "ongoing events". The statistics I have provided strech back over four years. As stated before, I don't se anybody contesting that "Stevedore" may have "enduring notability" (the second suggested point in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC), but do you not agree that "Stevedore" completely fails the first point, "usage"? That both the two other articles have a greater claim to being primary topic in that regard. None of the three article can lay claim on being primary target because none of them fulfill both points in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --Bensin (talk) 06:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And they don't have to. This has never been a requirement for a primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:18, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If both points need not be fulfilled, then why not go only with the first point instead and make Docker (software) the primary topic? I'll answer that myself: Because the two points serve two different purposes that complete eachother. If think the guideline as a whole is not applicable and you want to disregard the first point in this case, you'll have to come up with a good explanation as to why the first point should be disregarded, not just reiterate what the second point says or how well "stevedore" fulfills it. --Bensin (talk) 09:00, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's kind of funny that the page at WP:RECENTISM says nothing about naming, and yet it's among the top 20 most cited policy shortcuts in RM discussions. For better or for worse, I think it's become a sort of shortcut-as-hashtag, with an approximate meaning of "we should avoid WP:BIAS towards recent topics/sources". See also WP:ASTONISH, which I'm guilty of citing frequently in RM discussions, even though it points to a MoS guideline about article content rather than naming. Colin M (talk) 20:57, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. They're useful shorthands, which I think only the most pedantic (or those who disagree with the point being made) would criticise. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:39, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't critisizing WP:RECENTISM per se. I was raising the point that terms like "recent events", "breaking news", "news spikes", "day-by-day facts" and "ongoing events" do not well describe the article "Docker (software)" which is about a six year old software. Recentism means paying undue weight to something that very briefly is in a focal point, usually because of high media coverage. That is not the case here. For over four years, "Docker (software)" has consistently had more views than "Stevedore". Therefore, according to the first point in the guideline WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, "Stevedore" is not a primary topic. I object to any attempt of disqualifying other articles by applying the second point in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC before even considering the first point and then claiming "Oh, look! No contenders left!". You have a strong case in that "Docker (software)" is not the primary topic because of the second point, but the argument that "Stevedore" is not the primary topic because of the first point is just as valid. If you argue that not both points of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC should be applied here, you should explain why. --Bensin (talk) 07:22, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly the point that was being made. WP:RECENTISM is used as shorthand for: something shouldn't be considered primary because it is popular now (whether that be for the last three days, three years or fifteen years), despite another meaning being the commonest for decades or centuries, or that a latter topic shouldn't not be considered primary because something else may have more pageviews now. Basically it's shorthand for "look at long-term significance and not just at pageviews or current popularity". -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not proposing that "Docker (software)" be considered primary topic. This is not a discussion of whether "Docker (software)" or "Stevedore" is the primary topic. This is a disucssion of whether or not "Stevedore" meet the requirements to be a primary topic. Also, "Docker (software)" does not only have more pageviews right now today. It has consistently had more pageviews for the past four years, as long as there is available data to measure it. The fact that "Stevedore" may have "enduring notability" does not mean it is a primay topic if it does not also fulfill the requirement of use, and 15% of the page views is not enough to be a primary topic. --Bensin (talk) 14:52, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have explained why. Many times. You're just not taking it in. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide a link to an edit you made where you succinctly explain your reasons why not both points of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC should be taken into consideration? (An edit that does not just reiterate what the second point says or how well "stevedore" fulfills it.) --Bensin (talk) 14:35, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've started a new RM at Talk:Dockers#Requested move 13 August 2019 proposing that "Dockers" is a DAB or redirects to this DAB which currently is about a brand. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:45, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning oppose. Millwall F.C. is not really a legitimate contender for ptopic. It's connected to the term dockers (plural), which is merely a former nickname that's not even mentioned in the intro. Docker (software) on the other hand is strong competition, getting about 3x the monthly pageviews. Because there are only really two significant contenders, I'd rather have one be the ptopic with a hatnote link to the other. That way 99.9% of readers will get to their target with no more than 1 extra click, and some will be taken straight to their intended destination (vs. going to a dab, in which case everyone gets to their destination with 1 extra click). I'd actually favour making the software the ptopic, since it gets significantly more views and because "docker" is only one of 4+ potential search terms that users might use to get to Stevedore (whereas "Docker" is the only reasonable search term for the software). But I don't think the status quo is too bad either. Colin M (talk) 13:50, 13 August 2019 (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.

Proposed move of Docker (disambiguation) to docker

[edit]

A Google search for “Docker” results in all the results on the first several pages referring to Docker (software) and none referring to a stevedore. This may be a reflection of Docker having become significantly common a technology over the last few years since the previous move proposals above as far as I can tell. A user explicitly searching for “Docker” with a capital ”D” is almost certainly looking for the OS virtualization software. Suggest making Docker the disambiguation page for “docker” so that users searching for “Docker” can immediately find the link to the software. Note that “dockworker,” which is a more common term than “docker” as far as I can tell, already redirects to stevedore.  —PowerPCG5 (talk) 03:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 April 2021

[edit]
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Procedural close for now as another RM has been opened at Talk:Docker (software)#Requested move 4 April 2021 which would occupy the same target (non-admin closure) – Thjarkur (talk) 07:51, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Docker (disambiguation) → Docker – A Google search for “Docker” results in all the results on the first several pages referring to Docker (software) and none referring to a stevedore. This may be a reflection of Docker having become significantly more common a technology over the last few years since the previous move proposals above as far as I can tell. A user explicitly searching for “Docker” with a capital ”D” is almost certainly looking for the OS virtualization software. Suggest making Docker the disambiguation page for “docker” so that users searching for “Docker” can immediately find the link to the software. Note that “dockworker,” which is a more common term than “docker” as far as I can tell, already redirects to stevedore. PowerPCG5 (talk) 03:59, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the duplicate section (apparently was supposed to use a template to request moves); was afraid it might be unethical deleting a section that was already archived and/or timestamped.  —PowerPCG5 (talk) 03:59, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, the above move is also needed because redirecting Docker to docker (disambiguation) apparently violates WP:MALPLACED  —PowerPCG5 (talk) 05:33, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
From WP:MALPLACED: “A malplaced disambiguation page is one that has no primary topic but is not at the base name, e.g., when Fizzboz redirects to Fizzboz (disambiguation). This situation is avoidable, as the disambiguation page can exist at Fizzboz, and the accepted standard is to place the disambiguation page at Fizzboz.”
I would argue that the primary target for “Docker” should be “Docker (software)” since a Google search exclusively returns results for the software rather than for “stevedore” (at least for the first several pages of search results), but if consensus cannot be obtained for moving Docker (software) to Docker, I propose that at the very least the “docker” disambiguation page be moved to “docker” since “docker” can’t be a redirect to the disambiguation page due to WP:MALPLACED  —PowerPCG5 (talk) 05:43, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Docker&oldid=1252774009"