Talk:Godard (disambiguation)

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Requested move 29 June 2016[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. We have consensus that the filmmaker is the primary topic of the name "Godard". Cúchullain ^t/c 16:24, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Godard → Godard (disambiguation) – Godard should redirect to the acclaimed filmmaker Jean-Luc Godard; the surname is generally understood to refer to him when used unqualified (e.g. Godard's Passion, Carlton + Godard = Cinema, Godard/Spillane, Godard on Godard). His monolithic status is comparable to Hitchcock/Kubrick/Spielberg/Scorsese in that discussions on his films frequently omit his given name; it's simply not necessary as the name is assuredly meaning him in almost every context. Search results in books for "Godard" are naturally all about him. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 04:40, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this inappropriate primarytopic grab. Disambig page is better. Dicklyon (talk) 05:26, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support this appropriate primarytopic grab per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, and because filmmakers as noted as Godard tend to be well-known by their surnames only... disambig page is not better. Nohomersryan (talk) 05:56, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Decent evidence provided that "Godard" prominently means "Jean-Luc Godard" MelanieLamont (talk) 22:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support on same level of notoriety as Kubrick et al. @Taylor Trescott: perhaps you mean "mononymic status", not "monolithic status" — JFG ^talk 09:01, 4 July 2016 (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.