Talk:John Cade

Mitchell references

 * I've moved the two Mitchell references from the external links section to References. The second Mitchell reference is inadequate and may be deleted. Shelbypark (talk) 13:50, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 1 one external link on John Cade. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs for additional information. I made the following changes: When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080719084358/http://www.biotechnology-innovation.com.au/innovations/pharmaceuticals/manic_depression.html to http://www.biotechnology-innovation.com.au/innovations/pharmaceuticals/manic_depression.html

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:03, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 29 April 2019

 * 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 per consensus Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 21:28, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

– There are ten names listed at the John Cade (disambiguation) page with no substantiation of the psychiatrist holding such an exalted place in history that his name should top that of the other nine. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 18:30, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * John Cade → John Cade (psychiatrist)
 * John Cade (disambiguation) → John Cade
 * Strongly oppose Nominator fails to explain why this would not be a primary topic. There is not some "exalted place" a topic must reach to be a primary -- it is about relative notability among other topics of the same name. Please demonstrate that it would not be a primary using a guideline-baed argument.--Yaksar (let's chat) 01:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Lacking a historical record of how subject came to be chosen as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, this nomination will establish a consensus for any possible future assessments if "relative notability" plays a role here in deciding whether this would, rather than "would not be a primary topic". —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Please stop making these proposed moves that do not follow the actual primary topic guidelines. They are getting disruptive.--Yaksar (let's chat) 02:02, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I regret that you are experiencing feelings of disruption but, as you well know, Wikipedia is a consensus-based project and even when I was encouraged to WP:BE BOLD and make a unilateral move, such as at Talk:Fred Kennedy (footballer), I demurred, preferring to leave such decisions to consensus.
 * Some nominations, including Fred Kennedy and Talk:William McMullen (politician) have been successfully accepted by consensus, while other nominations, such as this one, may not succeed, but all will leave a historical record of primary topic discussions for future users and future generations.
 * As for "stop making these proposed moves", I am simply letting consensus decide and hope that you will also decide to extend sufficient good faith to the process and contribute productively to it with detailed arguments regarding retention of individual subjects as primary topics. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 07:10, 1 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose clear primary topic per pageviews |John_Cade_(antiquarian)|John_Cade_(jockey)|John_H._Cade_Jr.|John_A._Cade and historical significance. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 09:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Discussion
I'm staying out of this one, but would welcome comments at User talk:Andrewa/P T examples and scenarios. Andrewa (talk) 19:13, 6 May 2019 (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.