Talk:Robert Schnabel (ice hockey)

Requested move 28 September 2020

 * 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: Moved  (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:14, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Robert Schnabel → Robert Schnabel (ice hockey) – The computer scientist Robert B. Schnabel seems far more noteworthy than the hockey player, and most of the cited sources refer to him as just "Robert Schnabel". Both articles get very few page views. —BarrelProof (talk) 04:21, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:TWODABS. The current setup seems to be working fine. I doubt anyone will benefit from a two-entry dab page as opposed to the hatnote already in place. Station1 (talk) 08:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:TWODABS implies the opposite of what you are suggesting. If there are only 2 entries but no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, then there should be a DAB at base name.--Ortizesp (talk) 13:54, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You're correct. I shouldn't have linked TWODABS. I was thinking of the general idea expressed in TWODABS that: "If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed—it is sufficient to use a hatnote on the primary topic article, pointing to the other article. (This means that readers looking for the second topic are spared the extra navigational step of going through the disambiguation page.)" But TWODABS technically applies when two articles have identical names, like the example of John Quested, which is not the case here, since Robert B. Schnabel is not proposed to be moved. Still, as a guideline, I think the spirit applies: We don't need a dab page when a hatnote will do. Yes, it's true that both articles could be titled "Robert Schnabel" with no obvious primary topic, but with fewer than 2 people per day reading each article, a dab page seems superfluous to me. Station1 (talk) 06:21, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it is fine to consider one of them the primary Robert Schnabel for WP:TWODABS purposes, but the primary one should definitely be the computer scientist, who is very notable, not the hockey player. Although both articles have low pageview counts, is very clear that the computer scientist is much more important "with respect to long-term significance" since he "has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value" than the hockey player. The computer scientist is the president of a major scholarly society, is a Fellow of two scholarly societies, has been recognized by a White House–level award and other awards such as the the A. Nico Habermann Award, has co-authored a textbook cited by more than 10,000 scholarly works (according to Google Scholar), has been editor-in-chief of the major academic journal SIAM Review, and associate editor of four others, has published other influential scholarly works, etc. I thought about also proposing a move of Robert B. Schnabel to Robert Schnabel at the same time, but it seemed easier to consider the other move as a separate question. As I said, most of the cited sources refer to the computer scientist as just "Robert Schnabel". After all, if not a dab page or the article about the computer scientist, could be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to . —BarrelProof (talk) 15:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It looks like most available refs refer to him as Bobby Schnabel. Maybe his article should be moved to Bobby Schnabel and a hatnote placed on both articles? Station1 (talk) 06:21, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, the computer scientist is often referred to as "Bobby", although his formal publications and his listings in the lists of ACM Fellows and SIAM Fellows use "Robert B." The ACM CEO announcement and the CRA article about the Habermann Award and his IU faculty directory page all introduce him as Robert and then mostly call him Bobby in the remainder. My personal feeling is that Wikipedia should be a little bit formal and thus should also use "Robert" rather than "Bobby" in the article title, although that question could go either way, and a redirect should be in place in either case. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:03, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, and make DAB at base name.--Ortizesp (talk) 13:54, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination and Ortizesp. The ice hockey player is certainly not primary over the computer scientist. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 06:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support the move as proposed; however, if the computer scientist goes by "Robert B.", I would prefer the leftover redirect at the base name just become a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to the computer scientist, with a redirect hatnote (as opposed to a 2DAB). Create a Bobby Schnabel redirect to cover all bases. -2pou (talk) 21:00, 5 October 2020 (UTC)