Talk:David Douglas

Requested move 31 March 2016

 * 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.

Moved as proposed. The test for a primary topic is that it is much more likely to be the intended target than all other uses combined. The botanist is notable within his field, but does not appear to have the overriding historical significance accorded to someone who developed a new field or transformed an existing one. Thus, despite the importance of botany as a natural science, it does not appear that there is sufficient long-term historical importance to outweigh the importance of all other persons sharing this common combination of a very common given name and a very common surname. bd2412 T 23:30, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

– |Dave_Douglas_(trumpeter) pageview comparison shows that the trumpeter alone gets roughly the same amount of views as the botanist, therefore the botanist is not the primary topic. Inwind (talk) 14:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * David Douglas (disambiguation) → David Douglas
 * David Douglas → David Douglas (botanist)
 * I don't know. Is the trumpeter known as David? I might be inclined to support, however, based on the fact that the botanist isn't really getting that many hits. Nohomersryan (talk) 13:59, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. Too common a name to have a clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. Even just looking at the other articles called "David Douglas", excluding the Daves, the botanist gets fewer hits than the other articles.|David_Douglas,_12th_Marquess_of_Queensberry|David_C._Douglas|David_Douglas_(fighter)|David_Douglas,_Lord_Reston|David_Douglas_(rower)|David_Douglas_(director)|David_Douglas_(wide_receiver)|David_Douglas_(offensive_lineman)|David_Douglas,_7th_Earl_of_Angus As such, he shouldn't be treated as the primary topic.--Cúchullain t/ c 17:04, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment- Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, page views "may only help to support the determination of a primary topic", but "are not considered an absolute determining factor". There should be a far better argument than just traffic stats of why there's no primary topic. If I play the devil's advocate, I could say that people's dwindling interest in both history and botany have caused page views to suffer, but that doesn't mean he isn't the primary topic. If a rapper named Hugo de Vries became an overnight sensation, I wouldn't suggest moving the botanist just because page views are lower. The current argument is shallow and I'm leaning towards opposing on principle. Feed  back  15:33, 23 April 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.