Talk:Sebastopol (disambiguation)
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Requested move 20 October 2016
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion is: Moved as proposed. There is, however, not a clear consensus to merge the moved page into an alternate spelling. bd2412 T 15:29, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Sebastopol → Sebastopol (disambiguation) – Dab has a clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of Sebastopol, Crimea . ridiculously surprising obvious primary topic to me for a while which I considered ridiculous that it wasn't fixed by now, but now seemingly contested... :
- Sebastopol, Crimea is over 30x size (population) of all other places
- ...so bigger than all others put together
- Highest encyclopaedic value - historic, derived names, newsworthy (current) compared to all others items
- (and satisfies our guideline of a valid alternative bolded title in the lede per WP:MOSDAB / WP:D )
- Don't put much weight on newer spelling vs older spelling per WP:RECENTISM (e.g. see examples of the spellings of derivative places, which if anything indicates a separate "offtopic" from this RM reason to merge the two dabs, which is tangential to deciding the primary topic here and now)
I.e. create (primary topic) redirect from Sebastopol redirecting to Sevastopol. Per usual, we move the dab to Sebastopol (disambiguation) (then format the dab to have a primary topic - partly already done as I considered this uncontroversial maintenance. I think it still is, but the proposal wasn't clearly made). This is happens to be similar (but unrelated) to Sevastopol (disambiguation). Widefox; talk 10:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Ping add editors User:Gorthian User:Nyttend ([1] derailed this maintenance), User:Bkonrad, User:Floridasand, User:A bit iffy, User:JHunterJ . Widefox; talk 11:49, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Support. And FWIW, I'd be OK with merging the dab pages for Sebastopol and Sevastopol since these are merely variant transliterations of the same primary topic. older ≠ wiser 12:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Support. I don't think it's as ridiculous or uncontroversial, but while a Google web search (with &pws=0) favors the city in California for "Sebastopol".[2], Google Books search favors Crimea.[3]. If implemented, I'd recommend calling the California city out in the redirect hatnote on Sevastopol along with the link to this dab. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose, if I understand the proposal correctlySupport; [see updated comments below. Nyttend, 21 October]. "Sebastopol" is merely an older spelling of "Sevastopol", and there's no good reason to have separate pages for them. Sebastopol should redirect to Sevastopol, and Sebastopol (disambiguation) should redirect to Sevastopol (disambiguation), with entries for both titles being contained in the same disambiguation page. I think I've misunderstood something somewhere or another, so hopefully my reasoning clarifies my intentions. Please follow up with me if you have any questions. Nyttend (talk) 13:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Proposal is to have Sebastopol redirect to Sevastopol as the primary topic, which would mean first moving this disambiguation page to Sebastopol (disambiguation). IMO, there is no need to combine the two dabs, since they disambiguate different topics. I believe you support the proposal here (to make the Crimean place the primary for "Sebastopol" and get the dab out of the way of that). The merger or not of the two dabs can be proposed separately. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Offtopic agree with JHunterJ . The issue of merging the dabs is not an obvious outcome (due to size) so I'd prefer as nom to call that offtopic. I'd be happy if this primary topic redirect is understood for now. There's reasons to merge and reasons not to, but that discussion can be had separately, and later. Before proposing this move, I did of course check if it was an obvious merge, which I'm not convinced it is. User:Nyttend my CSD move wasn't detailed, but still just changing the target to the other dab isn't helpful. (clarified my "ridiculously") Widefox; talk 13:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- So it looks like the stuff I proposed is actually a support. I'll update the initial bit. Nyttend (talk) 20:12, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Offtopic agree with JHunterJ . The issue of merging the dabs is not an obvious outcome (due to size) so I'd prefer as nom to call that offtopic. I'd be happy if this primary topic redirect is understood for now. There's reasons to merge and reasons not to, but that discussion can be had separately, and later. Before proposing this move, I did of course check if it was an obvious merge, which I'm not convinced it is. User:Nyttend my CSD move wasn't detailed, but still just changing the target to the other dab isn't helpful. (clarified my "ridiculously") Widefox; talk 13:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Support. And FWIW, I'd also be OK with merging the dab pages for Sebastopol and Sevastopol since these are merely variant transliterations of the same primary topic as Bkonrad In ictu oculi (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Support per nom, other editor's comments above, and historical importance. Randy Kryn 15:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment on the offtopic merge comments: being transliterations of the primary topic is not particularly relevant to having different disambiguation pages. Cf: Peking (disambiguation) and Beijing (disambiguation), Hindoo (disambiguation) and Hindu (disambiguation). It's unlikely readers looking for the non-primary topics for either "Sebastopol" or "Sevastopol" would use the other spelling. -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. I agree the discussion of merging is separate. However, in this case, the difference is a single letter and in many dialects the pronunciation is so similar that it could be easily confused. older ≠ wiser 16:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment the only issue I have with merging the dabs is size. Agree, there's many good reasons to merge. Too big? Widefox; talk 16:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Too different. None of the non-primary topics are referred to with the other spelling. See also or distinguish hatnote will suffice. What's the reason to merge? -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- How different is too different? I often look up things that I hear, and where the pronunciation of the words may be indistinguishable, it is a PITA to have to sift through multiple pages to figure out which particular use was the one I wanted. older ≠ wiser 18:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Having no overlap beyond the primary topic is too different. We has separate dabs for Qat (disambiguation) and Kat (disambiguation), for Hare (disambiguation) and Hair (disambiguation) and Herr (disambiguation). Dabs for homophones link to each other, aren't simply combined. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Except that there is very little if any overlap in domains between those homophones. And unlike those homophones, all of these (directly or indirectly) are representations in English of the Russian (or Ukranian) Севастополь (i.e., unlike those other homophones which are complete unrelated except for sound, these are related). older ≠ wiser 19:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I've countered both of those. We don't lump together transliterations just because they're related, and we don't lump together homophones just because the pronunciations are indistinguishable. There is no overlap in the domains of the dabs Sevastopol and Sebastopol other than the primary topic. And "qat" and "kat" are both representations in English of the Arabic قات (https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/قات). -- JHunterJ (talk)
- Yes, you've made your opinion clear, I hope I've made myself clear as well (I don't agree with you--there are no black and white rules in this regard and this is something of an edge case). If and when there is any actual move to merge these, we can see what sort of consensus develops. Regarding domains, the majority of uses for both are as place names. And I call BS on bringing in a comparison with Qat/Kat -- while it is true Qat may be transliterated as Kat, the vast majority of uses listed on Kat are unrelated. Every entry on both Se{bv}astopol dab pages is directly or indirectly related to the city in Crimea. older ≠ wiser 20:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, you've made your opinion clear, even though it's BS -- the majority of uses of "Springfield" and "Chester" are places, but we don't merge them. That's not the "domain" here. The domain is the set of articles that are ambiguous with the title, not the classification of the topics of those articles. A reader looking for any nonprimary topic for either "Sevastopol" or "Sebastopol" will be done a disservice by the merging of the two completely distinct lists. Continue to Cf. Krakow (disambiguation) and Cracow (disambiguation). -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, you've made your opinion clear, I hope I've made myself clear as well (I don't agree with you--there are no black and white rules in this regard and this is something of an edge case). If and when there is any actual move to merge these, we can see what sort of consensus develops. Regarding domains, the majority of uses for both are as place names. And I call BS on bringing in a comparison with Qat/Kat -- while it is true Qat may be transliterated as Kat, the vast majority of uses listed on Kat are unrelated. Every entry on both Se{bv}astopol dab pages is directly or indirectly related to the city in Crimea. older ≠ wiser 20:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I for one, can see strong arguments both ways, so I'm not about to propose merging considering the size. Widefox; talk 20:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I've countered both of those. We don't lump together transliterations just because they're related, and we don't lump together homophones just because the pronunciations are indistinguishable. There is no overlap in the domains of the dabs Sevastopol and Sebastopol other than the primary topic. And "qat" and "kat" are both representations in English of the Arabic قات (https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/قات). -- JHunterJ (talk)
- Except that there is very little if any overlap in domains between those homophones. And unlike those homophones, all of these (directly or indirectly) are representations in English of the Russian (or Ukranian) Севастополь (i.e., unlike those other homophones which are complete unrelated except for sound, these are related). older ≠ wiser 19:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Having no overlap beyond the primary topic is too different. We has separate dabs for Qat (disambiguation) and Kat (disambiguation), for Hare (disambiguation) and Hair (disambiguation) and Herr (disambiguation). Dabs for homophones link to each other, aren't simply combined. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- How different is too different? I often look up things that I hear, and where the pronunciation of the words may be indistinguishable, it is a PITA to have to sift through multiple pages to figure out which particular use was the one I wanted. older ≠ wiser 18:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Too different. None of the non-primary topics are referred to with the other spelling. See also or distinguish hatnote will suffice. What's the reason to merge? -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:10, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- 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. No further edits should be made to this section.