Talk:Gallop (disambiguation)

More to say?

How come there's an 11-page entry on the canter but for galloping we just get 'Gallop is an asymmetrical gait used at high speeds by quadrupedal organisms such as the gait seen in the horse.'? --Oolong (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's a disambiguation page. The majority of information is currently in the horse gait article. However, because other animals gallop (including dogs, cheetahs, and even crocodiles), it would be nice to have a non-horse gallop page. It's on the to-do list, but I've been busy with RL stuff. Mokele (talk) 16:07, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, and there is material on the horse gallop at canter as well. There's been a sort of old debate on whether that article should be renamed "canter and gallop" or something, but ditto for not being a high priority. Montanabw^(talk) 16:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a disambiguation page the name should be changed to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallop_(disambiguation) Litch (talk) 00:37, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily. When people have a dispute over the primary topic, the word itself is usually the disambig, with a link to all the related articles. Until the time comes that a really good article can be written on the gallop (at least as comprehensive as the canter article) then I see no reason not to leave it as is. Montanabw^(talk)

Cite another example, preferably several, because I have never seen it done that way. In addition your callus revert destroyed additional text. Litch (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The "additional text" was half a sentence. Puhleese spare me the dramah. Examples abound, see, for example, Joker, set, mercury, and others mentioned at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Yes, it is most commonly used when there is a dispute over what the primary topic should be, usually the (disambiguation) link is created as a redirect. Here, we have several issues, the gallop is covered at both horse gait and canter, with the dab page pointing to canter; and though there is an argument to be made to make "gallop" a primary article, to do so by creating a one sentence stub is not a wise choice because there is so much material out there - it's actually a complex task for several reasons. First, the general topic suffered a significant amount of content forking a few years back, a nasty edit war that left several articles in shambles, and no one working on the topic has really had the time or motivation to go in and clean it all up. Second, there is a need for more research because equines are not the only animals that use a gallop. See leaping gait (created in the content fork war). Third, thanks to both content forking but also legitimate spinoff articles from canter, we also have bits in lead (leg), flying change and some other spots. So basically, until someone has the time to do it right, there is no reason why this can't stay as a dab. Montanabw^(talk) 05:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 February 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: moved. Number 5 7 12:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gallop → Gallop (disambiguation) – There is a clear main subject, Gait#Gallop. I am going to split the Gait article, since some information for some sections eg. "gallop" is also spread over other wikipedia page, and I am planning to consolidate them (see the discussion above). -M.Altenmann >t 20:29, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral but lean support: I am exhausted with RM discussions, else I'd take a stronger stand. The article canter has long included the horse gallop and Horse_gait#Canter_and_gallop also covers the topic. I am interested in Altenmann's proposal to clean up this group of articles, it's been something that would be good to do. I do agree that "gallop" does have a primary use, that of a quadruped leaping gait most commonly associated with the horse. Montanabw ^(talk) 05:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support, clear primary topic in terms of historical importance. bd2412 T 16:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle - do what you want, bro, and I'm sure it'll be better than a dab page. Red Slash 04:51, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:11, 26 February 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.