Talk:SBF

Requested move 16 November 2024

It has been proposed in this section that SBF be renamed and moved to SBF (disambiguation).

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

SBF → SBF (disambiguation) – toolforge:wikinav/?language=en&title=SBF shows 100% of the outgoing pageviews going to Sam Bankman-Fried and Bankman-Fried gets 45x the pageviews of the next most viewed item on this dab. charlotte ^👸♥ 01:40, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose: This topic is very heavy on WP:RECENTISM. In a decade, his article won't be so highly sought. Primary topics for TLAs are rare, and "SBF" has a lot of other meanings. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. AOC is a close precedent, which was redirected to the politician although the abbreviation has other meanings (particularly Appellation d'origine contrôlée). I don't think there's an equivalent on the "SBF" list, so redirecting to the person seems indicated here. Tevildo (talk) 09:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we should consider AOC a precedent, because that 2022 decision was far from free of controversy.

As it happens, I've actually updated Talk:AOC (disambiguation) with more information last month, if you're interested in how our understanding of ambiguous navigation has evolved over the years in that case, please feel free to have a look.

One thing that is substantially different here is that this person is going to be in jail for the next few decades, so is unlikely to have as much potential as a person who has no such issues. --Joy (talk) 13:59, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:DPT, let's actually try to understand WikiNav correctly - it says that in October, there were 231 views of SBF, and we could identify 145 clickstreams toward the proposed primary topic, while another 73 were filtered. So ~63% of the incoming traffic definitely proceeded there, and possibly some more out of the filtered 73 (though it's doubtful that the largest data point also suffers a lot from anonymization, that's more likely for the smaller ones).

A somewhat complicating factor is that the proposed primary topic is listed in the final Other uses section at the bottom, which may have led to some readers not finding it. At the same time, the average English reader is unlikely to assume that this three-letter acronym refers to one single topic, especially not a recent infamous one.

I'd say let's just just apply MOS:DABCOMMON and list this biography first to help those people who are looking for it, and reconsider this matter later when it's less of a recent phenomenon. (Oppose) --Joy (talk) 13:51, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We should also note the trends in page views for these topics - have to click logarithmic scale to see it - often, the traffic spikes at SBF have matched those at the full name (esp. two years ago), but more recently they also haven't - in the last few months, the traffic at the biography doubled but the traffic at the acronym generally stayed the same. This also indicates that these spikes are most probably transient and we shouldn't reorganize navigation because of them. --Joy (talk) 14:10, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Definitely no primary topic. It's very, very hard to make a PT case for an abbreviation. They have to be extremely well-known. This is not. AOC should never have been redirected. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:58, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]