Talk:James Wild (politician)

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 14 December 2019[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: consensus to move the rugby player, but no consensus to move the politician at this time, per the discussion below. As such, a disambiguation page has been created at the base title. Dekimasuよ! 04:50, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

James Wild (politician) → James Wild
James Wild → James Wild (rugby league)

– Member of Parliament is primary topic, over 1920s rugby league player who had 1-2 pageviews/day before recent increase caused by ambiguity with the politician. Hatnote guiding to architect James William Wild will need to be transferred to new primary topic, as well as hatnote linking to rugby player. PamD 18:53, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:29, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose James Wild (politician) → James Wild and Support James Wild → James Wild (rugby league). The three-sentence stubs for the politician and the rugby league footballer do not support notability claims of a level approaching WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If anyone were to be considered primary, it would be the architect James William Wild, also referenced as "James Wild", but the base name would be best positioned as the disambiguation page's main title header. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:56, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know this will sound very WP:CRYSTALy, but if you look at the vast majority of MP stubs created from the 2017 general election, most of them are decent size articles. It might be the case that this is revisted in 12 months from now, for example. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:15, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support James Wild → James Wild (rugby league). Make James Wild a dab page, including James William Wild.

There are 3 articles here, and no clear primary topic. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:16, 17 December 2019 (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.

Clarification of reason for protecting this article[edit]

New user apologies for any errors with content or format.

This article was locked after my last edit (done anonymously via IP as I had no account). I accept the removal of my last edits now I have read the relevant guidelines but would say that my edit was not vandalism but a good faith update that did not adhere to sensible guidelines.

I am now looking at how to make these edits within the rules but question if why protected as no other signs of vandalism from the history

Mknash1974 (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mknash1974, pretty much every edit to the article in the past day that is not a revert was inappropriate. Just look at the article history. I will leave a welcome template on your talk page with useful links that you can use to learn more about the policies and guidelines for editing Wikipedia articles. Schazjmd (talk) 20:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Schazjmd: Thanks, I can see what you mean now, I appreciate you taking the time. --Mknash1974 (talk) 20:43, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]