Talk:Michael Johnson

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:03, 25 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Note that this move discussion is still ongoing and therefore cannot be used as justification for placing Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) at the top of this disambiguation page as a putative primary topic. Einsof (talk) 23:38, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Priority
MOS:DABORDER a is the relevant guideline here. There are many ways to structure a disambiguation page but it's a long-standing, uncontroversial assumption that one valid way is to put the most common uses at the top, especially when a few tower over the rest:
 * In cases where a small number of main topics are significantly more likely to be the reader's target, several of the most common meanings may be placed at the top, with other meanings below. See Mojave or Mercury for examples of this.

This is right at the top of the DABORDER suggestions. The pageviews are self-explanatory here. It doesn't need to be the full primary topic to still deserve to go to the top. SnowFire (talk) 04:37, 9 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I strongly agree with SnowFire that we should be prioritizing readers and following the principle of least surprise. I cited similar examples such as Alcohol and English in my edit. It has nothing to do with being U.S.-centric or not, it has to do with matching readers' expectations when they search for "Mike Johnson". --MZMcBride (talk) 00:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It seems that you misunderstood the guideline. Please pay attention to the expressions like a small number of main topics and several of the most common meanings, which means the dab must contain at least two topics which are eligible to be primary so that the form of DABORDER is warranted. A famous example besides ones listed above is Georgia. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 01:40, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Split/merge discussion

 * I have split the Mike Johnsons to Mike Johnson, which was originally a redirect to this disambiguation page. Curbon7 (talk) 01:14, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I disagree with this, as well. Not to be grumpy, but "Mike" is an exceedingly common shortening of Michael, so many of these Michaels are also known as "Mike".  Furthermore, the Speaker of the House's "real" name is Michael (as are many of the other Mikes), so even if we did create a spinoff Mike Johnson page, he'd still need to be listed here, as well.  It doesn't really make sense to split here, it's just inherently going to be a long page due to the commonness of both names.  SnowFire (talk) 03:12, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This is already done for chaps like Mike Anderson, wherein Michael Anderson doesn't list the Mikes. This is an appropriate disambiguation split, in my view. No need to list Mikes here, as that is already covered with the "See also". Curbon7 (talk) 03:42, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Why are we making users click to the "See also", though? More generally, it's just not correct.  As I stated above, even if we had two separate DAB pages, the "Mikes" would be valid entries here, because many of the "Mike"s would reasonably be looked up by "Michael".  (And conversely, many of these people are known as "Mike" and should be on the other DAB page if we had two.)  I recognize this will lead to a long DAB page, but so what?  That just reflects reality, in the same way that other long DAB pages exist.  Can you please explain what exactly you think is being gained with this split?  I've added a merge tag to the newly created Mike Johnson article as I don't believe it's a good idea - almost every Mike / Michael I've personally known has been called by both at times.  SnowFire (talk) 05:21, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This is common with human name disambiguation pages. Curbon7 (talk) 05:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * See for example, the relationship between Michael Anderson and Mike Anderson. I would also add that a number of those listed at Mike Johnson are not listed as having the firstname "Michael", such as Mike Johnson (animator) and Mike Johnson (television personality). Curbon7 (talk) 06:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

(de-indent) I would argue that the example you have of Michael Anderson and Mike Anderson is probably incorrect too. We can each cite WP:OTHERSTUFF at each other as there are many, many, many disambig pages that do indeed combine multiple forms of a name. And... it's just common sense. Start with the case where a separate disambiguation page is not required, but just redirects; it's very common to have short or long forms of a name redirect. Peter Seeger redirects to Pete Seeger. Liz Taylor redirects to Elizabeth Taylor. Disambiguation pages are basically the exact same case, except when there's multiple. "Michaels" being abbreviated "Mike" is incredibly common, and almost every "Mike" is really named "Michael", so a single list is what makes sense. This is maybe the most obvious if you imagine a case where someone is known as both Mike and Michael, and usage is so close that a requested move discussion splits 50/50. Regardless of which form is picked as the article title, such a case clearly needs to be on both pages if a split is even done, since they're known both ways. So why not skip listing everyone twice, and just have one page?

Further, I note with displeasure you removed the merge tag claiming that there was no merge proposal. I will hope that the problem is you looked at the Mike Johnson talk page, but the "Discuss" link in the template goes to this talk page, so the merge target is indeed where such things are discussed (aka right here). The merge proposal is here, in this thread. It's fine to disagree with the proposal, but don't falsely claim I didn't make it. SnowFire (talk) 05:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry for removing the tag, my friend; I was confused as I did not interpret this as a formal discussion, so that was mea culpa. I think you make a good point with the last few sentences in your first paragraph, though I still think splitting here is the correct HN disambiguation procedure, so we may just have to agree to disagree on that front. Curbon7 (talk) 07:24, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

I've reverted 's split (and removal of the Speaker of the House from the top of the list) as there clearly is not consensus for his change. Walt Yoder (talk)
 * That is fine, per WP:BRD. That said, I don't think there is particularly strong consensus for the status quo either. Curbon7 (talk) 01:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Speaker listed twice
Currently Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) is listed on this page twice, once at the top and once in the body. MOS:DABORG does not seem to provide specific guidance on this, but it seems quite atypical when compared to other similar dab pages, such as John Kennedy (disambiguation) or Benjamin Franklin (disambiguation). Frankly, what is the point of listing him in the body if he is already the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and already thus at the top? Curbon7 (talk) 06:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)


 * The RM has been overturned. Thus Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) is not the primary topic at this time and shouldn't be placed at the top. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 16:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:34, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —The Sky Bot 10:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)