Talk:Escos

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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 12:51, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Escos → Escos, Pyrénées-Atlantiques – Escos should be changed to a disambiguation page to distinguish the commune and Francisco Escos. The tiny commune in France (with a population of jsut 222) cannot be the primary use of this term. The editor who move Escos, Pyrénées-Atlantiques back to Escos may be concerned that there are a huge amount of incoming links to the commune Escos. But that is just the result of the server lag caused by Template:Pyrénées-Atlantiques communes (This template is, in my view, an unnecessary template which has the same function as Category:Communes of Pyrénées-Atlantiques. But it is another issue and may not be discussed here). There are few "real" incoming links if we exclude the links generated by this template. --Relisted. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:17, 19 May 2014 (UTC) Neo-Jay (talk) 07:51, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Nothing is broken, really. Francisco Escos is not called just "Escos", and not too notable either (not that the commune is, either). Should there appear a third notable Escos, I would change my opinion, but for now it's just fine. (Most google hits are for plural of energy service company (ESCO)). No such user (talk) 11:22, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Then energy service companies (ESCos or ESCOs) is the third notable Escos and even more notable than the current two. Would you change your opinion? --Neo-Jay (talk) 01:07, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Not really. I think we should disambiguate only when necessary, and I don't think we reached that point here. Although all topics are fairly obscure, they are all naturally disambiguated; there is a hatnote in place, and I don't see how the reader could potentially get lost. No such user (talk) 11:49, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Even if they are naturally disambiguated, that's not enough for disambiguation purpose. Francisco Escos is a legitimate disambiguation entry for his last name Escos (You also agree to add the hatnote to the commune Escos, don't you?). And ESCOs is also apparently a disambiguation entry for Escos, just as ESCo is a disambiguation entry for ESCO. It's quite normal for users to type words in other forms of capital/lowercase to search for articles. They may type "esco" to find "ESCO", or type escos to find ESCOs.  If we do not turn Escos to a disambiguation page, we have to add another disambiguation hatnote to Escos: For energy service companies, see ESCOs. Then the tiny commune in France will have two disambiguation hatnotes while it is really not more notable than the other two. It is against the Wikipedia policy on disambiguation: "if an ambiguous term has no primary topic, then that term needs to lead to a disambiguation page. In other words, where no topic is primary, the disambiguation page is placed at the base name." --Neo-Jay (talk) 02:02, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * But the link from energy service companies and string "escos" is really stretched. I don't think that "escos" (plural) is a plausible search string for them. We shouldn't have a disambiguation page just because someone, sometimes, might arrive at an undesired page using an odd search string. No such user (talk) 10:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * There are as many as 567,000 results for escos by Google search. Most of them refer to energy service companies. Websites using "escos" (plural) as the acronym for energy service companies include, but are not limited to, US Department of Energy website, National Association of Energy Service Companies website, EU Joint Research Centre website, NYSEG website. Such huge amount of search result cannot be said to be just an odd search string. Maybe a disambiguation page escos is an undesired page for someone like you. But we cannot assert that it is not plausible for others. --Neo-Jay (talk) 19:24, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

As I said in another discussion:

This is a question of avoiding wasted effort through bad process synchronisation. Even if it's virtually certain the two-bit village will not be the wp:primarytopic for most of the potential stub with the exact same name (so not counting i.e. people with natural disambiguators like given names), it disrupts the rest of the wiki, with rippling secondary effects like e.g. leading editors into believing all places should be automatically disambiguated.

The right time to bring this to WP:RM is when you spot an actual Escos (big energy company) article (or fixit and write one yourself), that is something that can be actually measured and examined for wp:primarytopicness, and not some Platonic chimera. Because it happens rather more often than one would guess the next Escos is not one of the virtually certain candidates one had hypothesised about, but Escos (obscure ambient garage band of dubious wp:musicnoteability) or Escos (barely mapped settlement in the Peruvian jungle). walk victor falktalk 22:50, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Francisco Escos is a footy stub not an artist or composer likely to be known by his surname, and the surname itself doesn't warrant an anthroponymy article. I'm in partial agreement with Victor's comment above, with 2 differences. (1) we disambiguate by content not article. So when we see Chevron (company) "previously known as Escos Inc" (example only) then the topic "Escos" small text exists even though article doesn't, and we follow the topic not the article. ESCO: energy services company is dabbed by caps. (2) when other wps have notable articles and en.wp has non-encyclopedic content like an Argentine football stub Francisco Escos then a surname like Escos could be considered for a dab. But Escos is a rare surname, even rarer than Lejay, and has no notable bios in es.wp waiting to be translated. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:46, 19 May 2014 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.