Talk:Michael Armitage (politician)

Requested move 5 June 2017

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved. No support has been shown. (non-admin closure).  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )  15:49, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Michael Armitage (politician) → Michael Armitage – There are 2 articles on a Michael Armitage: this one Michael Armitage (politician), and Michael Armitage (RAF officer). I assess this one to be the primary topic based on WP mentions. A simple Google search is inconclusive between the 2 candidates. Move this article over the unnecessary disambiguation page at Michael Armitage and place a distinguish hatnote pointing to the other use. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The readers seem to look at both equally:https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range=latest-20&pages=Michael_Armitage_(RAF_officer)|Michael_Armitage_(politician)|Michael_Armitage so I'm not sure why you rank one significantly over the other Alex Sims (talk) 14:20, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It's just a question of choosing one, because if we can identify one of them as the primary topic, we can do away with the 2-dabs disambiguation page, which impedes navigation for 100% of people who land on Michael Armitage now, but only (let's say) 50% of users if it were to be the article for one person or the other.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:06, 6 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose. There is no rationale to move given above. "A simple Google search is inconclusive" - would that not tend to suggest that there is no primary topic? As to the above rationale about removing the need for a dab page with only two items, while I am sympathetic to the aim, it is not proper to manufacture a primary topic where one does not exist. Frickeg (talk) 08:02, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Page views do not support the claim that the politician is the primary topic; in fact, the RAF officer receives more page views.|Michael_Armitage_(politician)--Cúchullain t/ c 15:30, 16 June 2017 (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.