Talk:Gosforth (disambiguation)

Requested move 6 February 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 (non-admin closure)  —  Paper9oll  (📣 • 📝)  16:22, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

– No clear primary topic over Gosforth, Cumbria. Google Books appears to return more results for it (such as the cross) than the T&W one even though the 1st result is for it. Views[] do show that this Gosforth gets more than the Cumbrian village but Peter Taylor, Baron Taylor of Gosforth gets nearly half though he's a PTM. The Cumbrian village is shown on the A-Z Mini but the place in T&W isn't. This could also go to Gosforth, Newcastle upon Tyne but even though its part of the BUASD and has been in the district since 1974 it was formerly a separate district.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 20:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. Jack Frost (talk) 06:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Gosforth (disambiguation) → Gosforth
 * Gosforth → Gosforth, Tyne and Wear
 * Support per detailed nomination. WP:NOPRIMARY. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose Though from a historical point of view both are equally as notable and I don't disagree with a disambiguation being the landing page per se, I have a feeling that visitors may be more likely to be wanting to find information about Gosforth, Tyne and Wear, due to its larger population (23 times that of Gosforth, Cumbria), which is linked to the one in Newcastle's larger business presence (including the headquarters of a national bank) and larger number of noted residents. 373 articles currently link to Gosforth (Tyne and Wear), as opposed to 46 that link to Gosforth, Cumbria, though granted page views may be a better gauge. Page view analysis over a longer period than two weeks, max for that tool, show a slightly larger gap between the numbers of page views for the articles, with 6.3 times the number of page views, and still over twice the number of views as Peter Taylor's article (the Gosforth in his title, relating to the Tyne and Wear/Newcastle place name). TubularWorld (talk) 22:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 22:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose as unnecessary based on the size and significance of the places (23k with a wider zone of influence in local government, school and transport station names and consequently about two dozen articles for 'Gosforth XYZ' plus others that don't mention the name itself but refer to somewhere in the locality, vs 1k and I think 4 linked articles) and page views (1,576 in 30 days; 57 daily average over 90 days vs 386 in 30 days; 11 daily average over 90 days). I appreciate its not an exact science but seems pretty clear that one is the primary topic - even if everyone looking for the Cumbria article went to the Tyne and Wear article first, the volumes of traffic involved don't suggest to me there is any significant issue to resolve. Crowsus (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The town in Northumberland is the clear primary topic here. Peter Taylor was not known as Gosforth (he was Lord Taylor, not Lord Gosforth). The town is far more significant than the Cumbrian village. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:16, 8 February 2021 (UTC)