Talk:Melania

Requested move 23 January 2017

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: not moved. A similar RM was closed at Talk:Trump as no consensus. Consensus here, though, is a bit more clearly against a move. More specifically, the current FLOTUS shares a first name with two saints, both of whom have long-term significance, which makes primary topic status for FLOTUS questionable. (non-admin closure) JudgeRM (talk to me) 03:01, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Melania → Melania (name) – Also convert this to a redirect pointing to Melania Trump. The given name is relatively uncommon in the English-speaking world, there is clearly a primary topic here. Consider that Barack is a redirect to Barack Obama, not a given name article or a dab. Also, pageviews for this page went up on the day of the RNC, when the news broke of the now-FLOTUS's plagiarized speech, once again after election day, and once again on inauguration day, there is no reason that readers are looking for anything other than the FLOTUS from these statistics. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:55, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NO for heaven's sake, if someone looks up "Melania" they already know her surname, they are looking for something about the first name. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:04, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No good reason for the move. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:26, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. If this page is getting a high amount of pageviews because of Melania Trump, the current setup is not working. I see no obvious longtern significance challengers either. Nohomersryan (talk) 16:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nohomersryan: please look at this. Is it not possible that with 128,833 daily views for Melania Trump, the 56 who choose to look at "Melania" are actually looking to find out where the name comes from? If anything I'd be surprised the numbers looking at the name are so small. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Compare this, Barack has gotten virtually no page views compared to Barack Obama, so why does Barack still redirect to Obama's article, there is no evidence that people are looking about the name, if they are, they are easily lead there. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 23:04, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look back at news articles in 2008. People looking for "Barack" then when the name was new to people were evidently then looking for the origins of the name. Same as "Melania" today. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:44, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. We should not require the vast majority which is clearly looking for the person to type in the last name to get to the correct page. For the very few actually looking for information about the name, a hatlink will more than suffice. --В²C ☎ 18:19, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: wouldn't Melania the Elder and Melania the Younger have more long-term significance per PTOPIC? Chase (talk | contributions) 03:25, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It is not that rare a name, especially with two saints to it. The saints have long-term significance, include at least one placename. —Srnec (talk) 03:27, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose. As has been pointed out above, there are other Melanias with long-term significance. This is similar to the ongoing discussion on Talk:Trump. ONR (talk) 07:14, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Who's next? Ivanka? Bertdrunk (talk) 18:27, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As with "Trump", the page views are indisputable. Since the election, the three key names, "Trump", "Melania" and "Ivanka" have experienced enormous surges of searches which will undoubtedly continue for at least four years, but probably much longer. Similar to "Barack" and "Obama", the links for those three mononyms had been pointing to relatively sparsely populated and infrequently visited entries, until the sudden change for obvious reasons of recent historical intervention. "Donald", on the other hand, is a common name similar to "George", "Bill", "Ronald", "Jimmy", "Michelle" or "Laura", with the proviso that the unique nickname, "The Donald", already redirects to the president. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 22:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Roman Spinner, and yes, Ivanka should be redirected to the Ivanka Trump page, as soon as possible actually, because even on a slow day it reaches well over 30,000 views (many more now). Randy Kryn 14:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Analogy with Barack may not be valid. Firstly, a first lady is not as important as an actual president. Secondly, looking at Barack (disambiguation), there are just a handful of obscure other meanings. However, looking at Melania, there are more meanings, not all of which are that obscure e.g. a saint who is described as a significant figure in the Christian ascetic movement. PatGallacher (talk) 15:34, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pure WP:RECENTISM, per ONR and Chase. Ribbet32 (talk) 23:08, 28 January 2017 (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.