Talk:Peter Cazalet

Requested move 24 March 2015

 * 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: No move. Cúchullain t/ c 14:07, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Peter Cazalet → ? – This Royal Navy officer is not the primary topic of the same name. The racehorse trainer is not a primary topic either. Shall he be disambiguated as "Royal Navy", "Royal Navy officer", or "officer"? --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 21:49, 1 April 2015 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 03:55, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Peter Cazalet (military), Peter Cazalet (admiral) , or Peter Cazalet (navy) (Fixed typo for you. --George Ho (talk) 05:21, 24 March 2015 (UTC)) -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:40, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't follow why the move is needed but, if it is needed, then the correct disambiguation should be Peter Cazalet (Royal Navy officer). Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 21:49, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * @Dormskirk: Per WP:primary topic, this military personnel is no more significant or popular than the racehorse trainer. Agree? --George Ho (talk) 07:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Given there's only two of them and the RN officer was a knighted admiral I don't think there's any need for a change. But if change is decided, then it should indeed be Peter Cazalet (Royal Navy officer), the standard disambiguator for RN officers. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:14, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Support (Royal Navy officer) looks like a 60/40 WP:TWODABS from books. Not serving readers by not having a mobile friendly dab. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:38, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose In spite of the comparative length of the two articles, the naval officer looks like the slightly more important figure, not sure I follow about mobile friendly dabs. PatGallacher (talk) 15:23, 2 April 2015 (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.