Talk:David O'Keeffe (lawyer)

Requested move 22 April 2021

 * 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: Not moved. Supports and opposes are approximately balanced, but arguments for the move have a weaker basis in policy. WP:CONSISTENT has, to my knowledge, never been understood to apply across Wikipedias. Some tentative points have been made in the direction of this article being primary with respect to long-term significance, but this has not attracted consensus. (non-admin closure) Colin M (talk) 21:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

David O'Keeffe (lawyer) → David O'Keeffe – Suggest changing title from "David O'Keeffe (lawyer)" to "David O'Keeffe" as "David O'Keeffe" is the title for articles on the individual in 9 other languages on Wikipedia: French, Netherlands, Portuguese, Romanian, Polish, Slovene, Slovak, Italy, German. Also seems to create problems with Wikipedia Commons database connecting articles in the different languages. MarkHarper1 (talk) 18:24, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Have fixed the broken Wikidata entry – Thjarkur (talk) 18:55, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * There is also David O'Keeffe (footballer). Both articles have the same low number of views (~30/month). – Thjarkur (talk) 18:59, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:NOPRIMARY. 162 etc. (talk) 19:05, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Although the lawyer does have an entry in ten other Wikipedias (in addition to the already-listed nine, there is also a listing in the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia), uncertainty may still remain as to whether his notability is sufficiently high for primary status over the footballer. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose the footballer gets a comparable number of views (24) than the lawyer (33)[|David_O%27Keeffe_(footballer)].  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 07:58, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:NOPRIMARY. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support I do not think the number of page views is the best criterion. Here the comparison is between a retired footballer player and a sitting federal judge who is also a very eminent legal scholar in Europe and the English-speaking world.  I see the lawyer has also received several non-English awards for distinction as well as an English one.  I hate these comparisons but I understand the OP's concern that an individual should have the same reference name in various language versions of Wikipedia and it can be confusing. Grotius2018 (talk) 15:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support David O'Keeffe (lawyer) is a legendary judge known in most English-speaking countries as well as in Central and Eastern Europe. If it is just a question of notability, I would say that they are both well-known in their own fields. The reason for coming down on the side of the lawyer and not the footballer is that the lawyer plays a very consequential role in public life and has done for a very long time.HarleyQuinn2020 (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support david o'keeffe (footballer) does not have the same international profile as david o'keeffe (lawyer), even in French-speaking countries!MarcDutheilDelaRochere (talk) 21:29, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: The arguments put forth by the nominator seem completely irrelevant. What other Wikipedias choose to use as article titles should have no bearing on our choices at all. Am I missing something? Andrewa (talk) 23:18, 29 April 2021 (UTC)