Jump to content

Talk:Rohit Thakur

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Primary topic

[edit]

I have assessed Rohit Thakur (politician) as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC based on the higher coverage in secondary independent media, as compared to Rohit Thakur (soccer). Venkat TL (talk) 08:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RedPatch please explain your move. Please review WP:2DAB. Venkat TL (talk) 12:42, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles are stubs and all the content about the politician seems to be WP:RECENT. If long-term significance can be shown to make him primary topic, then I would be fine with making it primary, but he was elected today, so I think it's simply WP:TOOSOON. I revert the move per WP:BRD. I would be open to a WP:RM to see if the wider community determines whether there is a Primary Topic or if the Disambiguation page should stay. RedPatch (talk) 12:53, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RedPatch the politician is a three time MLA. How are you calling him recent? Please read the article once again. The results for the politician are far more than the player. The player only has primary sources. You have made a mistake, You should admit it and make amends. If you disagree and think that you are not mistaken, then you need to explain. And the above comment by you is made on a mistaken basis and is factually wrong. Because of your error of judgement, you are adding unnecessary more work for everyone and wastage of time too. --Venkat TL (talk) 13:15, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do see now that I misread it. I read it as elected on November 2, I did not see the third time. With that said, given the other article was there first, rather than just moving one and replacing it with the other, I think a WP:RM should have taken place rather than to commandeer the article location. Now that I created the disambiguation page, a RM can still happen and the wider community can decide. I'm not convinced it's clear primary status, given he's still a very local state politician, not even at national level. I'm not sure if it's prominent enough for clear primary status. Given he's been a politician for many years and the article was only created today does seem to indicate it's not a clear primary topic, otherwise it would've been created well in advance. I can place a RM request and the wider community can weigh in. Per WP:BRD, that is a recommended option. RedPatch (talk) 15:14, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RedPatch, First you made a mistake in reading. That is ok. All you need to do is but a CSD U1 and then you can revert your changes. Why do you want to put an RM and waste other people's for your mistake? If you have a reason to dispute my assertion that the three time elected representative is the primary topic, then I would like to see your evidence backing up your reasoning. If you are not sure of anything, then why dont you just revert your own changes, because I am sure. Venkat TL (talk) 15:26, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I gave my rationale that I still don't think he's primary as he is a very local level politician. Since we disagree about whether he is primary, I think a RM is a good source of a compromise, so that more input can be added from others. RedPatch (talk) 16:46, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RedPatch one is a hundred times the other. There is a difference of order of magnitude. Is this enough to convince you? This is clear evidence to prove WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. This discussion thread serves as a Consensus. Venkat TL (talk) 16:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A rename request is a perfectly reasonable outcome. Posting a nasty message on my talk page is not needed. Disagreements happen and the key is to be WP:CIVIL when they do occur. If it is indeed primary topic, the community can decide, that is why the community is there. I have participated in many RM requests and am very familiar with the process and this is a situation I have seen played out. If anything, given your confidence in your view, you should probably be pleased that a RM request is occurring as it could potentially lead to a preferred outcome for you. RedPatch (talk) 17:53, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This was absolutely necessary to bring to your user talk page, because you have repeatedly referred to me in your nomination statement, when there was absolutely no need to do that. On the article talk page, talk about the subject of the article, not about editors. That is basic etiquette that you clearly lack. Since I had to object to you referring to my username, the only expected place for me to do that is on your userpage. Venkat TL (talk) 05:22, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 November 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: not moved.

One editor strongly supports this move, but three other editors (including the proposer) disagree on the basis of WP:NOPRIMARYTOPIC. While news searches do show more coverage for the politician, the opposing editors plausibly argue that this is because he has been in the news recently, so WP:RECENTISM would apply. If after 6 months pageviews show a clear preference for the politican, Venkat TL may have a good basis to open a fresh RM.(non-admin closure) Havelock Jones (talk) 22:35, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rohit Thakur (politician) → Rohit Thakur

Rohit Thakur (soccer) was previously the sole article at Rohit Thakur. On November 2, User:Venkat TL created the article about the politician who won a local election that day and moved it to the primary name and moved the soccer player to a disambiguated title. After reading the politician's article (a very local politician - not even at the National Indian government level), I felt the disambiguation page was needed as I do not think it had primary status and also disambiguated it and created the DAB page for both articles to be listed at the base name. I do not think either person is clear primary topic as one is a local politician and one is a lower level FPL footballer. Given there was disagreement (allowed for both of us per BRD) - see the discussion above, I am creating this RM as a compromise to get wider input from the community since the Discuss part of the BRD does not seem like it will be resolved. The move was so recent, that page views won't be able to serve as a way to see if it is primary. RedPatch (talk) 16:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rohit Thakur (politician) has results ~ 500 times the other. There is a difference in order of magnitude. This is clear evidence to prove WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --Venkat TL (talk) 17:25, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Google/web searches aren't the only way to look at this. Especially when you've done a proper Hindi language search for it, but just a generic English language search. Claiming the Indian is more important than an American with the same name seems like a WP:BIAS to me. Neither are highly important, and we shouldn't presume which one people will be looking for in the long run. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:28, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a fair amount of coverage of the soccer player in the "all" tab on Google, and the Indian politician has just won an election, so the numbers will be higher now than on average. In the long run, Wikipedian users won't necessarily be looking predominantly for the Indian politician, either is an equally likely search term in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:30, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I have not claimed that American is more important than Indian or vice versa. I object to your comment accusing me of your imagined biases. I have shared my opinion with evidence, where is your evidence? I am sure that the soccer guys make a lot of coverage in Independent media when the matches or on, just like politicians make during elections. And yet the soccer guy only managed 7 articles throughout his career on Google news so far, while this politician managed 500 times that coverage. Did you check the All tab for the politician? Aren't you making ridiculous one sided comparisons in an attempt to claim importance just because you are a football fan? Venkat TL (talk) 15:44, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well you're clearly just ignoring me: Google News isn't picking up most of the coverage about the soccer player, there's lots more in a general Google search. We shouldn't be basing whole decisions on one search engine, especially when Google News isn't picking up all the news articles that exist. My point is that both are equally notable (i.e. none is more notable), and trying to claim otherwise is incorrect in my view. And I believe these stats are misleading because not all coverage is in Google News. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:47, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Instead of writing walls of text here, it will be beneficial for the discussion if you bring "UNBIASED" evidence, not mere words, to decide on WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here. Venkat TL (talk) 15:50, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Notified: Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Venkat TL (talk) 17:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.--Ortizesp (talk) 23:39, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose clear case of WP:NOPRIMARYTOPIC, despite the insistence of one user to argue with anyone who says this (in this thread, my talkpage, the previous section). Shouting primary topic at people doesn't make it true. Indian viewers would most likely be looking for the politician, American viewers for the soccer player, so we should make it as easy as possible for everyone by having the DAB page, rather than just assuming everyone wants to know about the politician, which isn't the case. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:40, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
we are talking 7 vs 4000 news articles. Is that even a comparison. You can apply as many "strong" "extra strong" etc in your comment, but without evidence backing it up, it does not count for much. Venkat TL (talk) 15:45, 3 November 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:Rohit_Thakur&oldid=1254778222"