Talk:Beechwood Cemetery

Requested move

 * 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 move request was: Moved as requested Fences  &amp;  Windows  22:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * p.s. I didn't feel a disambiguation page was necessary, I've used a hatnote instead. Fences  &amp;  Windows  22:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Beechwood Cemetery (Ottawa, Ontario) → Beechwood Cemetery Beechwood Cemetery → Beechwood Cemetery (disambiguation) The Beechwood Cemetery in Ottawa is Canada's national cemetery. It is also a National Historic Site of Canada, has been designated as the National Military Cemetery of the Canadian Forces and inspired a well-known poem. It is clearly the primary topic, as compared to the other Beechwood(s) cemeteries. A Google search shows the vast majority of links pertain to the cemetery in Ottawa, with a smattering of links pertaining to the cemeteries in just outside Toronto (in Concord) and in Durham, North Carolina. The article on the Ottawa cemetery should be at the plain title (it was at the plain title until about 7 months ago when it was moved without discussion), with a hatnote pointing to the disambiguation page (I am not even sure that the other Beechwood cemeteries meet WP:N). Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 19:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Move back to original title. Only 2 articles use this title, the other being a stub about the Durham cemetery with less than half the pageviews last month and only one incoming link. Just put a hatnote on this one. Station1 (talk) 00:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose There are tens of Beechwood Cemeteries allover the world. --Foroa (talk) 19:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not really the point. The proposed moving back of the article is based on the naming guideline at WP:PRIME, not on the basis that there are no other cemeteries named Beechwood.  Assuming any of those other cemeteries could meet the minimum requirements at WP:N to have their own Wikipedia article (and that is a big if - the one article at Beechwood Cemetery (Durham, North Carolina) is still a stub, so it's hard to know), the issue at hand is whether any of them are as significant as the cemetery in Ottawa such that the Ottawa facility is not the primary topic.  --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, i think the rule of thumb is that more than half of all readers have to be looking for one article, not just for it to be the most popular article out of many. I think u meant that this further standard will continue to be met. --doncram (talk) 21:36, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that there is any such rule of thumb. Article traffic is listed as just one of several tools which may assist in determining primary topic, and none of which are determinative factors. Having said that, I would suspect that more than half the traffic would continue to be to the Ottawa article. -Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support as primary topic for this name. --Polaron | Talk 13:29, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Request, questions, comments
 * 1) Why doesn't the current disambiguation page at Beechwood Cemetery show the Requested Move discussion is underway? Isn't that supposed to be automatically added in a multiple move request?  Would the requested move nominator please add notification there?
 * 2) How many pageviews would go to many other Beechwood Cemetery articles, if those were created too. Not sure the Ottawa one would still get more than half of total.
 * 3) There are is at least one other Beechwood Cemetery in Ontario, at Concord/Vaughan in Toronto area.
 * 4) I don't oppose a finding either way about whether the Ottawa one is regarded currently as wp:PRIMARYUSAGE, but if PRIMARYUSAGE is determined then the Ottawa one should show a hatnote to the disambiguation page, rather than a hatnote pointing to the admittedly less important one in North Carolina. Other Beechwood Cemeteries will get added to Wikipedia over time and join the dab page, just set it right now, for good. --doncram (talk) 18:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, Doncram. To answer you questions in the same order: (1)You're right.  The discussion and links were created automatically, as you suggested, so it didn't even occur to me.  I will add a note manually to that talk page.  Thanks for the heads up. (2)There is no answer to that question.  I suspect that since Wikipedia now has 3,300,000+ articles, but still no articles on those cemeteries, I suspect very few pageviews.  But that's just a guess. (3) The cemetery in Concord is mentioned above where the page move is proposed. (4)Agreed.  That was always my understanding about how it would work - that way the hatnote need not be updated if new articles ever do appear. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I answered the question about the note on the talk page for the current disambiguation page. A bot did add a note over there about this discussion, but the talk page was still redirected to the talk page for the article on the Ottawa cemetery, so the bot's note would not appear.  I deleted the redirect, and it's fine now. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that clears it up! Glad it is not the bot that is failing, it was my omission a while back not to replace the redirect. --doncram (talk) 21:36, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * support the National Cemetery of Canada clearly has more coverage than the empty stub for Durham. 76.66.195.196 (talk) 13:15, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Clearly the primary topic.  Skinsmoke (talk) 05:49, 28 June 2010 (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.

requested fix of requested move
I don't think that the requested move was implemented properly. I've requested a revision to the way the requested move above was closed and implemented, at User talk:Fences and windows. --doncram (talk) 12:42, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Caption questioned
The caption to the photo depicting Boy Scouts laying wreaths to two Fathers of the Confederation buried in this cemetery needs its date checking out. The occasion is stated to be the 'golden jubilee' of the Confederation but the year given as 1927, which, if correct, would be properly the DIAMOND jubilee of the Confederation which was formed in 1867.Cloptonson (talk) 21:17, 21 May 2014 (UTC)