Talk:Frederick Stuart (Australian politician)

Requested move 21 August 2020

 * 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: moved, and WP:MALPLACED not repudiated. --  JHunterJ (talk) 11:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

– The seven-sentence stub for the Australian who served two years in state legislative assembly nearly a hundred years ago [not to be confused with his contemporary, Frederick Stewart (Australian politician)] does not reveal a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over Frederick Stuart (British politician) who was an 18th-century MP. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Frederick Stuart → Frederick Stuart (Australian politician)
 * Frederick Stuart (disambiguation) → Frederick Stuart

No contest Doug butler (talk) 06:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Unquestionably no primary topic here. Frickeg (talk) 06:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No primary topic, but leave Frederick Stuart (disambiguation) as it is and redirect Frederick Stuart to it, repudiating WP:MALPLACED. Hiding the diambiguation page from the title auto-complete is bad.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:41, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This suggestion is completely against general practice and I strongly oppose it. Frickeg (talk) 08:18, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And why, may I ask, do you oppose it? Why should the DAB page be disguised as an article?  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It is not "disguised" as an article. As our guidelines (WP:DABNAME) very clearly state, the disambiguation page should have the title of the ambiguous term. It is not the job of the title auto-complete to be a kind of mini-disambiguation, and having "(disambiguation)" after a dab page without a primary topic is completely pointless. Might I suggest, though, that if you really do believe that every dab page should have "(disambiguation)" after its name, consensus for that should be sought elsewhere rather than on an obscure page about two long-dead politicians. Frickeg (talk) 09:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed, DABNAME says stuff, but is that the only reason? Why did someone write that into DABNAME?  I’ve looked and can find no reason other than it was made up in the first days. If you look, you’ll see me having proposed with at WT:DAB and other places. This is not a new proposal.  This page is the prime sort of example of the poor outcome of long unquestioned practice.  This name, this title, was associated with a certain biography. After this RM, a very sensible case of retracting a poor PT assumption, will result in the DAB moving from explicitly titled as a DAB to being what was once a biography. How does that help anyone? I think you are unaware of how many people make use of the so called search box autocomplete, and how useful it is to have recognisable titles to choose from.  Having “(disambiguation)” suffixing every DAB page has obvious benefits, especially for those who thing DAB pages are undesirable unless you really want it.  It also has mislinking advantages. This page is a prime example for why DAB pages should not go to the basename per DABNAME and MALPLACED.  You’ve immediately “strongly opposed”, and I ask: Do you have a reason beyond what some guideline text says, do you have a reason base on any reader experience?  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:42, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It is not a new proposal, but it is also one that has failed to gain consensus at this point. I am not necessarily "strongly opposed" to the point as such, although I do tend to prefer precision in page titles (also, I am far from convinced our average reader even knows what "disambiguation" means, and if they do, can't they just see the options in the auto-complete bar anyway?). But what I am strongly opposed to is having this discussion piecemeal on different RMs that lots of people won't see. There are cases where practice changes naturally in advance of our guidelines, but this is clearly not one of those cases, and seeking to implement your preferred view after it has failed to gain consensus at other venues is not helpful. Frickeg (talk) 23:18, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support the British politician gets more (34) than the Australian one (13)[|Frederick_Stuart_(British_politician)].  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 16:55, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Page view stats indicate no clear primary topic.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:58, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. No clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. No clear primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:58, 27 August 2020 (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.