Talk:John Cade

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Australia: Melbourne Low‑importance

	Australia portal John Cade is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Medicine B‑class Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mitchell references

I've moved the two Mitchell references from the external links section to References. The second Mitchell reference is inadequate and may be deleted. Shelbypark (talk) 13:50, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on John Cade. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080719084358/http://www.biotechnology-innovation.com.au/innovations/pharmaceuticals/manic_depression.html to http://www.biotechnology-innovation.com.au/innovations/pharmaceuticals/manic_depression.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:03, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 April 2019

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 per consensus (non-admin closure) Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 21:28, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

John Cade → John Cade (psychiatrist)
John Cade (disambiguation) → John Cade

– There are ten names listed at the John Cade (disambiguation) page with no substantiation of the psychiatrist holding such an exalted place in history that his name should top that of the other nine. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 18:30, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly oppose Nominator fails to explain why this would not be a primary topic. There is not some "exalted place" a topic must reach to be a primary -- it is about relative notability among other topics of the same name. Please demonstrate that it would not be a primary using a guideline-baed argument.--Yaksar (let's chat) 01:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lacking a historical record of how subject came to be chosen as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, this nomination will establish a consensus for any possible future assessments if "relative notability" plays a role here in deciding whether this would, rather than "would not be a primary topic". —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making these proposed moves that do not follow the actual primary topic guidelines. They are getting disruptive.--Yaksar (let's chat) 02:02, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I regret that you are experiencing feelings of disruption but, as you well know, Wikipedia is a consensus-based project and even when I was encouraged to WP:BE BOLD and make a unilateral move, such as at Talk:Fred Kennedy (footballer)#Requested move 11 April 2019, I demurred, preferring to leave such decisions to consensus.

Some nominations, including Fred Kennedy and Talk:William McMullen (politician)#Requested move 15 April 2019 have been successfully accepted by consensus, while other nominations, such as this one, may not succeed, but all will leave a historical record of primary topic discussions for future users and future generations.

As for "stop making these proposed moves", I am simply letting consensus decide and hope that you will also decide to extend sufficient good faith to the process and contribute productively to it with detailed arguments regarding retention of individual subjects as primary topics. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 07:10, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose clear primary topic per pageviews [1] and historical significance. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 09:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

I'm staying out of this one, but would welcome comments at User talk:Andrewa/P T examples and scenarios#John Cade. Andrewa (talk) 19:13, 6 May 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.