Talk:Donald Stewart

Requested move (closed)

 * 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: Reverted bold move and restore pages to original state Tassedethe (talk) 16:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Donald Stewart → Donald Stewart (disambiguation) — The Scottish MP was the primary meaning until a few hours ago, he appears to have been "demoted" without discussion, which should not have been done. He was an important political figure, leader of the Scottish National Party for several years. PatGallacher (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Donald Stewart (MP) → Donald Stewart
 * 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 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: Pages moved. Ucucha 02:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Donald Stewart → Donald Stewart (MP) Donald Stewart (disambiguation) → Donald Stewart — I understand the reversion of a contested move, but it's a pity that the previous move request was speedily closed, because there is no clear primary topic in this case, so the disambiguation page should occupy the undisambiguated title. I agree that the Scottish National Party leader was a very significant character, but so was Sir Donald Stewart, 1st Baronet (a field Marshal who led operation in one of previous British invasions of Afghanistan). Disambiguation is neutral way of allowing readers to choose for themselves which figures they find more important, and one article should be selected as the primary topic only when it is significantly more important than all the others combined. That is not the case here. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Statistics of page views for last month (before page moves) are as follows: Donald Stewart 254, Sir Donald Stewart, 1st Baronet 156, Donald Ogden Stewart 554, Donald W. Stewart 376, Donald Morton Stewart 37 and Donald Stewart (judge) 48. It's clear that the SNP politician doesn't meet the standards of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and should be moved to Donald Stewart (MP). (I closed the RM above as it was my bold move that started it. I was planning my own RM request but am happy to tag onto this one. ) Tassedethe (talk) 16:55, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose the politician was a crucial figure in the rise of the Scottish National Party as a significant force in the 1970s. He was an MP for 17 years, their only MP during 1970-73, then the leader of their parliamentary group for several years over a crucial period.  Even now a lot of people in Scotland will have heard of him.  The military commander now seems rather obscure, the Second Anglo-Afghan War article says little about him, suggesting that he did not play a major role. PatGallacher (talk) 18:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Pat that sounds like a recentist argument, that the SNP leader is more important because he is more recent. The Oxford DNB has two articles on people called Donald Stewart: one on the SNP leader and one on the invader of Afghanistan (subscription or library card required to read them), so clearly regards both of them as significant figures. Which of them is more significant is really a POV issue; for those of us interested in the growth of Scotland's independence struggle, the SNP leader is by far the most important, but for those interested in the history of Afghanstan or in military history, the field marshal is by far the most important. The current use of the primary topic concept is fatally flawed because it leads to a thoroughly POV majoritarian view of whether apples are more important than oranges, but even by any of the current approaches to that guideline I can see no grounds for choosing any of these people as the primary topic. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * 'Support On the basis of page view statistics. With reagard to the SNP politician, he may well have been important but he isn't the only important figure of that name. Also, I doubt many people outside Scotland have heard of him either. 84.92.117.93 (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Support I see no reason to consider the Scottish Member of Parliament to be the primary meaning. What about the British field marshal? Or the US Senator? Or the American writer?  TJ   Spyke   22:23, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Support A very high standard of notability must be met in order to be considered as the primary topic (heads of state, world-renowned writers, movie stars, etc.) Even Jonathan Edwards, whose biography occupies several pages in the Encyclopedia Britannica, to the exclusion of other possessors of that name, is denied his place and listed among ten other Jonathan Edwardses as Jonathan Edwards (theologian). Similarly, James Stewart, a top star, also listed in the Britannica, to the exclusion of others of that name [with a redirect to the Stuart royals], appears among twenty-nine others as James Stewart (actor).  The Scottish Member of Parliament cannot meet that model of world notability.  I suggest, however, that another parenthetical qualifier be considered rather than the deprecated "(MP)" which, although still remaining in a few articles dating to Wikipedia's early era, has been replaced by qualifiers which more-clearly elucidate the subject's notability, such as, in this instance, to specify his constituency, "(Western Isles)" or, possibly, "(Scottish National Party)" or, ultimately, that well-worn standby, "(Scottish politician)" [national identification thus differentiating him from the American senator who was not known to use the middle initial "W.", which is presently part of his main title header]&mdash;Roman Spinner (talk) 16:35, 6 March 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.