Talk:Nayeem

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 September 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

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

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

India: Andhra Pradesh / Odisha / Telangana Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Andhra Pradesh (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Odisha (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Telangana (assessed as Mid-importance).

Experienced editor plesse help in improving this artical

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Experienced editor plesse help in improving this artical Iamheentity (talk) 11:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I have moved this back into your User space until you are able to sufficiently source the article with reliable sources and prove the subject's notability. Strikerforce^Talk 14:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Iamheentity (talk) 17:29, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want help from other editors, u have to use WP:Article Wizard to create article in draft space. --DBig Xrayᗙ 14:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate page rename

Hi User:Strikerforce this page move from Nayeem to to Md Nayeem is inappropriate and violates WP:COMMONNAME please self revert the page move. I can assist you in the move, but would want your agreement in the revert before i actually do it. regards. --DBig Xrayᗙ 14:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Nayeem(gangster)" - which was its prior location - wasn't correct, either. I'm agreeable to "Nayeem", but not an outright revert back to "Nayeem(gangster)". Strikerforce^Talk 14:16, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it can't go to "Nayeem", as there is already an article there. Let's work on a different name. Strikerforce^Talk 14:17, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I can, make it goto Nayeem. User:Strikerforce, As I offered above, I have the required rights to Make this revert. I just need your confirmation (consensus) to do that. regards.--DBig Xrayᗙ 16:06, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

based on the Notability, I believe making these moves.

Nayeem -> Nayeem (actor) + Mohammed Nayeemuddin -> Nayeem
Nayeem -> Nayeem (actor) + Mohammed Nayeemuddin -> Nayeem (gangster) + Nayeem (dab page). --DBig Xrayᗙ 16:14, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Nayeem (gangster)" is, in my opinion, inappropriate no matter which way you slice it. Moving the existing Nayeem to "Nayeem (actor)" is fine. Have to have a better qualifier than "gangster" for Mohammed Nayeemuddin. Strikerforce^Talk 19:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Strikerforce, I went ahead and moved the Md. Nayeem page to Nayeem. Due to 1) WP:CommonName of the person. and 2) more popular among the two Nayeems. Let me know your opinion based on policy if you disagree with this reason. Now on a side note, adding gangster is appropriate see Category:American mob bosses--DBig Xrayᗙ 19:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely disagree with this. You should have waited for consensus. Where is your proof that this specific subject is "more popular among the two Nayeeems"? I intend to revert. Strikerforce^Talk 20:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Two things, DBigXray. First I have the required rights to make this revert - just because you can doesn't mean you should. And in this case one person's opinion does not equal consensus. Second, I agree with Strikerforce that this was absolutely an uncalled for and bad page move. Additionally the disambiguation of (gangster) is absolutely ridiculous. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Strikerforce Relax, both of us agreed that Md Nayeem is not appropriate, so there was no reason to let it stay there, specially since the article is at AfD. we can continue our discussion and I am not saying a further move is not possible. regarding my reason. It is based on the sources presented in the article and google hits. Please let me know your reasons and your suggested name for this article --DBig Xrayᗙ 20:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And in your assessment how did you alone determine that this person who has yet to be convicted of a crime and is covered like the subject of a rag-mag was the "more notable of the two"? CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Chrissymad, As I said above, None of the sources of the Nayeem (actor) provide a significant coverage to this person other than Passing mention or trivial coverage related to the promo of his first film Chandni. In my opinion the actor even fails WP:NACTOR. And This is based on the analysis of all the sources including those in Bengali language. This actor acted in a few films and took a 2 decade hiatus from the film industry "to pursue family business" and recently returned as a director. Anyway, as I asked above I am still waiting from you and User:Strikerforce on a suitable name for the Nayeem gangster's article. regards --DBig Xrayᗙ 20:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just because "both of use (sic)" agreed, @DBigXray:, that doesn't mean that you should have unilaterally made the move. My move of the original "Nayeem" article to Nayeem (actor), itself done unilaterally, was proper, given our ongoing discussion here about making "Nayeem" a dab. That was the correct outcome, prior to this article being nominated for deletion, and would have included both the "actor" article and whatever proper disambiguation had been determined for this article. (ec) Yes, and you should be waiting for suggestions, rather than trying to apply BOLD to this specific situation, in my opinion. Off the top of my head, I don't think that there's a good disambiguation that doesn't violate BLPCRIME, but that would still be a subject of discussion and the reaching of a consensus. Strikerforce^Talk 20:28, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've missed my point entirely. You based this on your evaluation and yours alone and failed to evaluate the sources in this same article which at best amount to coverage i'd expect to see in National Enquirer. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:30, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that way, then feel free to nominate Nayeem (actor) for deletion. I actually would probably be a delete !vote in such a discussion. But, that still doesn't properly address the issue at hand of your unilateral page move here. Strikerforce^Talk 20:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Guys, please review these sources I used for judging the notability of the gangster. To summarise, First is the Official statement on the Chief Minister's website about him[1] Then coverage in Mainstream national media, with coverage spread over several years related to his links, crimes, death, investigation post death. (Note: no tabloids in the list.) cheers [2] [3] [4] [5][6] [7] [8][9] [10] [11] [12]--DBig Xrayᗙ 20:43, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you solely made this decision without the input of anyone else and assessed it based on a dozen sources which report the exact same thing. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recentism shouldn't be applied when determining which of the two "Nayeem" articles is more notable. Strikerforce^Talk 20:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have undone the disputed move. Please use Wikipedia:Requested moves to open a formal discussion regarding the title if it is not desirable. Until a consensus emerges on which article is the primary topic, I have left Nayeem as a disambiguation page. Thanks. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Frayæ The name Md Nayeem is against Wikipedia:COMMONNAME which suggests "Nayeem" and is not supported by sources. ~~Chris~~User:Chrissymad and SF have still not suggested any Title supported by policy yet. --DBig Xrayᗙ 21:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Two things, first my name is not Chris and second, it's not up to a sole 2 or 3 editors. It's not a race. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 21:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ec As I stated above, I'm not sure - off the top of my head - that there is a proper title that fits here, under policy. That still doesn't mean that we have a consensus to move the article. It is reasonable to assume that someone searching "Nayeem" could be looking for articles about either this alleged criminal (using alleged because, to the best that I can see in the available references, he was never actually convicted of the crimes of which he was accused) or the actor. As such, Nayeem is being properly used as a disambiguation currently. For now, we have an article about the alleged criminal that is under his given name, which - while not "common" - is still factually correct. You can't use the fact that nobody else has, in the several hours that this subject has been open for discussion, yet provided a better alternative name for the alleged criminal's article to unilaterally move it to Nayeem. Strikerforce^Talk 21:16, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Even now No Justification has been provided for moving the name to "Mohammed Nayeemuddin" By Strikerforce. I can see see that he was the first to move this and after being asked by me at the beginning of this thread, I was expecting a policy based justification but so far I have not recieved any justification of this move. I have already explained my justification for using the WP:COMMONNAME Nayeem. Had there been a reasonable justification provided for using "Mohammed Nayeemuddin" I would have self reverted the move myself.--DBig Xrayᗙ 12:58, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it because "Nayeem(gangster)" was most certainly not the proper title for the article (how is that encyclopedic?) and, given that we already had an article at "Nayeem", moving it to his legal name was factually correct (i.e., encyclopedic), if not exactly supported by common name. The way that I saw (and still do see) it, we needed to fix problem #1 (the inappropriate original title) and then address problem #2 (finding a better title) through the building of consensus here. To do that, I took the action that you've now questioned multiple times. Factual accuracy over guidelines should have been the outcome here, but you've insisted on trying to be a one-person consensus and have, thus far, not shown much of an effort toward solving the above-mentioned problem #2. I contend that there is no logical new name for the article that satisfies all guidelines and policies. Thus, leaving the article about the alleged criminal under his given name is correct until such time as someone is able to come up with a better title. Strikerforce^Talk 14:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DBigXray, controversial page moves should be posted at WP:RM. It looks like you have the page mover right, so you should know this. Brad v 13:09, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Strikerforce, I am asking a policy based justification and yet you keep repeating that "Nayeem(gangster)" was most certainly not the proper title" well according to whom ? Where is the policy that says so ? This is simply your personal opinion per WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I linked the Category:American mob bosses as en example, I hope you are aware that there a Proper encyclopaedic articles with the title James Burke (gangster), William Colbeck (gangster), Thomas Egan (gangster), James McLean (mobster) etc. I can go on and on but I hope you get the idea that there is nothing wrong with such titles.
You say moving it to his legal name was factually correct (i.e., encyclopedic) well, Where is the evidence that "Mohammed Nayeemuddin" is his legal name ? this is just your opinion, of his legal name, there is no evidence based backing of this as a legal name. The word Mohammad is often added as a prefix to islamic names, Please note that Formal Islamic names of Indians in this region are commonly very long. Not sure where you have found "Mohammed Nayeemuddin" but just because a website used this name does not make this his legal name. In any case, we have a policy WP:COMMONNAME that dictates clearly that the name being used most commonly by the mainstream media has to be the title of the article, does not matter whatever is the formal or legal name, the article title "has" to be the common name. This is the official statment [13] of the CM and it only usees "Nayeem".
The problem is with your opinion for which you are still unable to find any policy to back it up with. Article titles are selected based on policy and not personal likeness or dislikeness. --DBig Xrayᗙ 18:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're challenging that Mohammed Nayeemuddin may not be his legal name? That's an interesting argument, given that your own provided references elsewhere in this discussion all give that as his legal name. Are you now saying that those references aren't reliable? The existence of "gangster" as a qualifier on other articles doesn't automatically make it correct here (or there). Finally, while you're quoting policy, could you please show me - and others that have questioned you on this very matter - how you, backed by that policy, can correctly arrive at the conclusion that "Nayeem" should apply to this article and subject only and not the, in my opinion, correct disambiguation page that it currently points to? You've not yet done so, other than to show results of Google searches, which are still going to rely on assumption as to what the reader is looking for rather than good practice. Strikerforce^Talk 18:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are calling Md Nayeem as his legal name without providing any source that calls it his legal name. FYI, You have to establish it first. This is the official statment [14] of the CM and it only usees "Nayeem". --DBig Xrayᗙ 18:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that common sense should also be considered here. Your own references (bolded for emphasis because the fact is important to a large part of this entire debate... if those references aren't reliable enough for his given name, the article has little or no reliable sources to begin with and the AfD should be closed as Delete), which you stipulate to be reliable sources, refer to the alleged criminal by both "Mohammed Nayeemuddin" and "Nayeem". Therefore, given the presence of an article already titled "Nayeem" and the stated desire to consider moving this article to the name, I moved the previous article and included the qualifier "(actor)" in the title. Now, we must reach a consensus here as to the proper name of this article. You are continuing to beat the drum about disagreeing with me, rather than being proactive toward suggesting a new name for this article. Instead, you're insisting that Chrissy or I must be the ones to provide a new name. That simply isn't true. Strikerforce^Talk 18:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Asking for "Policy" or "references to prove" your claim is not "beating the drum". It is expected of editors in a talk page discussion to provide them without asking. You have failed to answer in spite of asking repeatedly. Kindly understand that I am not your adversary here, Both of us here, are in a discussion with a noble intention of finding the best title per policy. And I have shared the policy and refs expected of me with my preferred title. Please do not misquote me, Nowhere I claim the Md Nayeem is his name, It is you who thinks so. Now with regards to the "Common sense" are you questioning the common sense of all those editors who created and are watching the numerous articles that have the dab "gangster"/"mobster"/"criminal" in the article title ? . Please understand that the POLICY are decided after larger consensus. If there is a clash between a Policy and a personal opinion. Policy prevails simply because of a larger consensus. You cannot claim your "common sense" trumps the existing policy, that is a silly statement. --DBig Xrayᗙ 18:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And I quote you, well, Where is the evidence that Mohammed Nayeemuddin is his legal name ? this is just your opinion, of his legal name, there is no evidence based backing of this as a legal name. The references that you, yourself, placed into the article all give that as his legal name, in addition to referring to him as "Nayeem". Therefore, it appears that you are now saying that those references are wrong and, thus, not reliable sources. So, please, clarify... which is it? Are they reliable sources, thus affirming that Mohammed Nayeemuddin is the subject's legal name or are they unreliable sources, which would dictate that they should be removed from the article (in this case, leaving the article with little or no sources at all). That is the crux of my comment that it would appear you've either missed or are choosing not to address. Strikerforce^Talk 19:03, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Strikerforce Please link the source you are talking about. --DBig Xrayᗙ 19:23, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Strikerforce Since you failed to reply, I went ahead and reviewed all the sources in the article and none of it claim Md Nayeemuddin as his official or legal name. So our claim of this title being the legal name has no factual basis. Let me know if you have any other point in support of this title. --DBig Xrayᗙ 18:27, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you stipulating that the sources are reliable? If so, their use of Mohammed Nayeemuddin clearly shows a legal name, albeit a likely - as has been pointed out elsewhere - shortened version of such. So, unless you're saying those sources aren't reliable, in which case they should be removed from the article, leaving it largely unsourced... I believe that I've presented this same argument elsewhere in this discussion. Strikerforce^Talk 14:59, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Strikerforce yes the sources are reliable. And no It does not show any "legal name". These sources are just using one of the 3 common aliases for this person. His legal name can be something totally and completely different, for all we know, since he is a criminal and it is usual modus operandi to hide ones legal name. News sources will use certain common names. and Wikipedia article has to follow the most popular name among the ones used by these reliable sources per WP:COMMONNAME.--DBig Xrayᗙ 15:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To expand in greater detail - Reference #1 (Times of India) - Renegade Maoist-turned gangster Mohammed Nayeemuddin.... Reference #2 (One India) - most notorious gangster, Nayeemuddin alias Nayeem. Reference #3 - SATP.org - ...belonging to former Naxal leader Nayeemuddin alias Nayeem.... Reference #4 - TheHindu.com - ...after a 15-month-long hunt but Nayeemuddin.... Reference #5 - India Times - Subsequently, fugitive Nayeemuddin alias Nayeem.... Reference #6 - Telangana Today - ...on Saturday arrested slain gangster Nayeemuddin’s wife.... Reference #7 - New India Express - ...arrested two associates of slain gangster Mohammed Nayeemuddin.... Reference #8 - Hindustan Times - ...who amassed thousands of crores, Mohammad Nayeemuddin had come.... Reference #9 - NDTV.com - ...Maoist-turned-gangster Mohammed Nayeemuddin, who was.... Only Reference #10, the statement from the Chief Minister, only refers to him as "Nayeem".

So, once again, are you stipulating that at least some form of "Mohammed Nayeemuddin" is not the subject's legal name? Strikerforce^Talk 15:11, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so , at this point, I think it's correct to say that we aren't going to be able to agree on this issue. I've presented my argument, you've presented yours, and we disagree. I'll step back and let someone else consider everything, but to unilaterally say that "Nayeem", as an article name, should point to this specific article is in error, in my opinion. The current disambiguation page is procedurally correct. Strikerforce^Talk 15:15, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unless, you find out a reliable source that actually says "legal name", anything you guess will be nothing more than WP:OR. you have failed to provide any ref that calls out his legal name and yet, you keep repeating that this is his legal name cuz 1 website used it in the article. this is really absurd. your opinions without any refs backing up your claim holds no weight. The Official source and most of the Mianstream sites call him Nayeem so that is the best suitable title for this article per COMMONNAME policy. --DBig Xrayᗙ 15:27, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Strikerforce And may I know what is your obsession with the legal name ? No wikipolicy states that legal name has to be the article title. First of all there is no evidence of this subjects legal name, and even if it was there, it is not going to be the article's title anyway. So this whole arguement based on Legal name is moot and useless. The Policy is on Common name and per Common name "Nayeem" is the title. --DBig Xrayᗙ 15:41, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last that I'm going to comment on this matter, because I don't feel that you're quite grasping what I'm trying to say here and we're just wasting each other's time going back and forth - I have no doubt that "Nayeem" is the name by which he was commonly referred in the region. Zip, zero, nada. This entire discussion has been a dispute over whether or not this article should carry the name "Nayeem". That title was already in use. To further clarify, I moved that existing article to a more specific qualifier (in this case, "actor"), and "Nayeem" became a dab, pointing here and to "(actor)". You are continuing to beat the wrong drum here, DBX. We can go back and forth about whether or not Mohammed Nayeemuddin is this person's legal name, but it really doesn't matter in the big picture. The point of this entire thread was to find a correct name for this article, not debate about whether or not the full name used in nine of the article's ten sources is his legal name. So, as I stated above, we can agree to disagree on that matter, and someone else may step in and debate with you about a proper name for this article. I don't believe "gangster" is appropriate for use in an encyclopedia (and I feel the same about all of the other examples you laid out about 10K bytes ago in this discussion), but if that's where consensus takes things, okay, cool. But, a one person "consensus" is not appropriate, no matter which way you want to look at it. Strikerforce^Talk 15:52, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

its your choice if you want to continue or not. I will summarize the key points now. --DBig Xrayᗙ 16:13, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

The Subject has been named in Official sources as Nayeem.
The subject has been named as Nayeem, Gangster Nayeem, Nayeemuddin and Mohammad Nayeemuddin ( in the order of usage in main stream media)
The claim that "Nayeem (gangster) name is inappropriate" is simply a personal opinion and has not been justified by any policy so far. On the contrary several articles exist with titles as Gangster, Criminal and mobster in the title name.
There is no source that claims a particular name as a legal name.
Both of us, agree that Nayeem is the common name.
per WP:COMMONNAME the title Nayeem should be the article title.--DBig Xrayᗙ 16:13, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is a reasonable summary of the positions. I would highly recommend starting a formal requested move discussion, as the AfD looks to be a clear keep and will be closed soon. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 17:19, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 October 2018

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: Move to Nayeem, overriding dab page. Add hat note to one other use. (non-admin closure) В²C ☎ 01:02, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Nayeemuddin → Nayeem (gangster) – Official sources name him as Nayeem. He is named as Nayeem, Gangster Nayeem, Nayeemuddin and Mohammad Nayeemuddin ( in the order of usage in mainstream media). Per WP:COMMONNAME Nayeem should have been used but currently a dab page exists there. Page was created at Nayeem(gangster) and was moved unilaterally without discussion to Mohammad Nayeemuddin. DBig Xrayᗙ 09:42, 10 October 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 21:21, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Nayeem. This is a WP:2DAB situation. Move the gangster article to Nayeem and delete the disambiguation page. The gangster is clearly WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and should be at the base name. The other article might not even be notable. Flooded with them hundreds 18:01, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting that I completely support the Policy based suggestions, put forward by User:Flooded with them hundreds --DBig Xrayᗙ 18:30, 27 October 2018 (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.

Nayeem (criminal)

Nayeem (criminal)

@DBigXray:, @Flooded with them hundreds: the result of above mess is obviously not the only nor even most notable Nayeem (name). Would you object to (criminal) as the disambiguator? In ictu oculi (talk) 21:05, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi In ictu oculi, No the disambiguation is redundant here. There are only 2 people commonly known as Nayeem. The quite popular gangster and the less popular Actor. I havent seen any other people known simply by Nayeem. in such a situation the existing status should prevail. --DBig Xrayᗙ 08:05, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@DBigXray: you weren't aware of the India soccer coach? page views - Note that Nayeem is the actor in the earlier section of page views (orange line) the coach (blue line), the Naxal (red line) gets a spike because of new article creation and deletion controversy above. The cricketers, see Nayeem (name), have not been included. @Flooded with them hundreds: and @Born2cycle: are okay with a new RM bringing the soccer coach into discussion, are you? In ictu oculi (talk) 12:26, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, The common name of the coach is Syed_Nayeemuddin among the mainstream media. Quoting: "Syed Nayeemuddin more commonly known as ‘Nayeem Sahib’ among the country’s footballing fraternity is far from happy likewise many other past stalwarts.[15]" --DBig Xrayᗙ 13:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are 3 okay with a new RM and you are against. Would you go with it anyway? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:04, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the 3 who are ok ? what am i missing here ? --DBig Xrayᗙ 14:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Myself, Flooded and Born2Cycle. Or to (gangster) which is what you originally asked for. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And where did they said so? As I noted above, I had already changed my proposal in support of 100s proposal, as indeed it was the best choice. --DBig Xrayᗙ 14:23, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"And where did they said so?" They said so on their Talk pages when I asked them. Do you really strongly object to a new RM? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:29, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To get up to date with the latest discussion, you need to check out User_talk:Born2cycle#Close_of_Talk:Mohammed_Nayeemuddin_RM. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:34, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Frayæ thanks for pointing to the discussion. --DBig Xrayᗙ 14:48, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

based on whatever I have searched so far, I dont agree that Nayeem is the COMMON NAME of the coach. hence the proposal to move this page isn't really a valid proposal. The coaches article is already at its common name and I see no reason to move it to anywhere else. --DBig Xrayᗙ 14:32, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not asking if you agree with the proposal, I understand that you consider that this Nayeem is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for all Nayeems combined and will vote against the proposal, I am simply asking if you will stand in the way of a new RM? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:36, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LoL, I dont like standing in the way of anything. If you have a strong reason, why not discuss it here with me. and generate a Consensus. We finished a RM that stretched for 3 weeks, and now you want another RM without explicitly giving your reasons for doing that. --DBig Xrayᗙ 14:39, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for another RM is so that other uses can discuss whether this Nayeem (gangster) is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for all Nayeems combined. If you dont like standing in the way of anything, is that an okay? In ictu oculi (talk) 16:08, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This does not look like it will be satisfactorily resolved without having a discussion on the new points raised so I think it is a good idea to frame it in a RM and do it in the normal procedural way. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:23, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In ictu oculi The Question whether the gangster is a primary topic or not only arises if there are multiple conflicting contenders for the WP:COMMONNAME Nayeem. So far from my testing I do not believe the coach has a common name of Nayeem. Just because Coach has a name that contains Nayeem does not really make him a contender for this Title. If you are claiming that the coach's Common name is Nayeem, then can I have your evidence for the same ? --DBig Xrayᗙ 17:16, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So that'a green light for a new RM. But DBigXray, only seeing the existence of COMMONNAME articles is not how Primary Topic works, please see Hurricane In ictu oculi (talk) 23:17, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May I know what is your expectation from this new RM, what moves are you planning to request ? --DBig Xrayᗙ 23:46, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would be proposing allowing editors to consider bringing Nayeem (name) as a common name to baseline, and Nayeem either to Nayeem (criminal) or Nayeem (gangster), as you originally proposed. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please follow WP:INDENT while discussing on talk page threads. Please note that my Original proposal as I presented in the first section of the thread on this page was Nayeem, and Even During the Requested move discussion I was of the opinion that "Nayeem" title for this is supported by both WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The moves you suggested above are not supported by policies. the Page Nayeem deals with people whose name are more than just Nayeem. this is not an expected outcome for a person who is trying to look for Nayeem. I have added a hat note for the other uses of the word Nayeem. hence I am in strong opposition to your suggested moves. --DBig Xrayᗙ 13:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You proposed Nayeem (gangster) and now you, alone, are strongly opposed to what you proposed, so opposed you're even opposed to it being discussed? I don't really know why I'm extending the politeness of asking, since others have said a new RM is justified, and you clearly don't understand WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are misquoting me again and again, For the record, as this diff clearly shows the name "Nayeen" which is the common name of this person was my "first proposal" and "Nayeem" as mentioned in the RM discussion [16] was also my "final preferred" name. Yes, I was open to other titles during the course of that discussion, but after gathering more evidence my final position is "Nayeem". I hope I have clarified myself sufficiently now. I will appreciate if you do not misquote my position again. regards. --DBig Xrayᗙ 21:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]