Talk:Peter of Spain

So
How are the arguments made by these Spanish nationalists? Is there any good being served by keeping this page separate from Pope John XXI or should they simply be d and a #Controversy section added to the page? — Llywelyn II   15:41, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 17 October 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: Move. We have clear consensus that the topic most readers will be looking for under the title "Peter of Spain" is this one, making it the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for this term. The pope is clearly more notable as a figure, but we saw no indication that he is known as "Peter of Spain" outside of his (possible) identification with the author. I have also closed the RfC as consensus seems pretty clear already. On another note, if the modern sources are clear that the author Peter of Spain was probably Pope John XXI, it may behoove us to merge the author's content into the pope's article, in which case "Peter of Spain" would redirect, but as long as the articles are separate the status quo seems to be the preferred option. I will delete the dab page as uneccesary and add hat notes to distinguish with the Petrus Ferrandi Hispanus. Cúchullain t/ c 18:13, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Peter of Spain (author) → Peter of Spain – Mover said it was not primary topic, but the dab s/he created has (i) this guy, (ii) probably the same person and (iii) a red link. In other words, it is clearly the primary topic. – Srnec (talk) 00:03, 17 October 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 10:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:13, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Peter of Spain (pope) is well-known as a pope, but how well known is he under the name "Peter of Spain"? And, the first 2 are probably the same person, not certainly. And for Peter Ferrandi of Spain / Petrus Ferrandi Hispanus see this Google search, and thereby perhaps turn the redlink into a bluelink to an article about him. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:19, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 * See this Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article. The author/logician/philosopher is primarily known as "Peter of Spain" and this is the main meaning of that name. His identification with either of the other Peters is an open question, but neither of the others is primarily referred to simply as "Peter of Spain". The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy explicitly differentiates the logician and the pope, while the the Oxford Companion to Philosophy makes them the same. The Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages has the best summation: "A name to which more than 800 MSS containing texts about logic, natural philosophy, zoology, medicine, theology, and alchemy are ascribed. They belong to the authorship of several different persons, of whom the most significant is the logician who wrote a much-commented Tractatus, which until the 17th century served as a standard textbook on logic." This article ought to be about the logician with a long explanation about his identity and about the numerous other works attributed to a "Peter of Spain". In this case, a dab page serves no useful purpose. A hatnote to Petrus Ferrandi Hispanus and Pope John XXI will suffice, but a reader looking for Peter of Spain is looking for the author of the Tractatus. (I realise my original rationale made it look like I take for granted the identity of the logician and pope, as LlywelynII does. But I don't. I only meant to reflect the way Llywelyn was presenting it.) —Srnec (talk) 13:16, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure where you got that I took their identity for granted. If I had, I would have merged the page, not dabbed it.


 * Further, I'm at least one counterexample to your misconception that logicians are more notable than popes. — Llywelyn II   22:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The relative notability of logicians and popes is irrelevant. The question is, to whom does "Peter of Spain" primarily refer? The answer is the logician. Srnec (talk) 22:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Support per accurate and sound analysis above. A hatnote under the two articles is enough. Cavarrone 19:01, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment the rational above appears sound. I have reached out to LlywelynII regarding the rationale for her change and will await her reply before closing this with consensus. Tiggerjay (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose, obviously. The logician is the primary meaning of the name at an encyclopedia of, dictionary of, and guide to philosophy. The pope is the standard referent in general. There is no primary topic here... unless it is eventually established that the pope is the same guy. (The two combined together are more notable than the third figure, granted.) That said, the identification of two contemporary Peters of Spain ("what are the odds?") is sometimes assumed but the best modern scholarship hasn't established it for certain ("low enough to treat them separately: it's a pretty basic name"). The proper approach is to dab. Moreover, if it were established that these two were the same person, the pope is so much more notable that the proper approach isn't to nix the dab. It's to merge all of the logician's material to the pope's article, as that is now his more common name in most contexts. —  Llywelyn II   21:57, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The name "Peter of Spain" primarily refers to the logician, not the pope. It is irrelevant that the pope is a more notable person. Srnec (talk) 22:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * In doing some research it appears that it was long believed (for hundreds of years) that Peter of Spain may have been Pope John XXI however more recently that has been discovered to be a false understanding and . Furthermore searching on Google, they all appear to point to the author primarily, and the only reference to the pope was the previously mentioned assumption they were the same person. Additionally, the only wiki information supports that Pope John XXI (or minor variations thereof) have been the exclusive on wiki name for this article. And it was only recently when LlywelynII created a new redirect at Peter of Spain (pope) (as part of the DAB creation and related page moves) prior to that, no specific connection between the two. There appears to be no specific support to justify that the pope is the intended target when someone is looking for Peter of Spain, and furthermore, it is most likely that if someone is looking for the pope through his previously thought connection with Peter of Spain (author) then it would be most appropriate to keep them connected with the author, instead of supporting their false understanding that the Pope and Author are the same person. Tiggerjay (talk) 15:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Support as per my comments above. Tiggerjay (talk) 20:05, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I already pointed this out but again, fwiw, your understanding is mistaken. Your comments above state that there was a single person Peter of Spain and the pope was confused with him. If that were the case (obviously) the single person would be the primary topic. It is not the case: the pope was Peter of Spain; the leap of logic was whether or not he was identical with the other Petrus Hispan(ic)us credited with the logical works. The logical work was conflated with the pope because he was already and separately known as Peter of Spain and was contemporary with the author. The pope's greater notability is quite germane. The logician is quite obviously the at treatments of philsophy; he's not a solid  here. —  Llywelyn II   12:48, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Could you please provide some references which establish him as Peter of Spain outside of the context of the logician? Tiggerjay (talk) 15:16, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Pinging - would love your insight as the only current opposer of this move. Tiggerjay (talk) 00:15, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Support. It's hard to imagine someone looking for information on Pope John XXI searching for Peter of Spain---unless they were interested in his work as a logician (whether or not he actually was that person). On that basis, it seems reasonable to have Peter of Spain focus on the logician, with hatnotes to the pope and Peter Ferrandi. HGilbert (talk) 11:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Rfc
Heya. We just need some more eyes and opinions about a move discussion. There were two 13th-century figures known as "Peter of Spain" (Petrus Hispanus) who may or may not have been identical with one another: one was a logician and the other became Pope John XXI. Since they have often been conflated, some editors would like to treat the logician as the and just place a hatnote dab for the pope. My own view is that, even though the pope's is Pope John XXI, his notability is great enough that Peter of Spain should remain a dab between him and the logician. A third option—since absolutely nothing is known of "Peter of Spain the logician" apart from the texts ascribed to him—would be to eliminate "his" article altogether and just treat "him" (to the extent he ever existed) at pages dealing with his works. Thoughts? — Llywelyn II   13:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC)


 * (adding contribution to discussion above.) HGilbert (talk) 11:20, 31 October 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.