Talk:Steve Hewlett (journalist)

Requested move 7 February 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: Disambiguate both. Steve Hewlett will be a disambiguation page. There is no consensus on which Hewlett is the primary topic. Aervanath (talk) 06:20, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

– The print and broadcast journalist has had a long and significant career, editing or hosting several major programmes and writing in national newspaper The Guardian. From 2009 to May 2014 there was a redirect from "Steve Hewlett" to his current show, The Media Show. This was overwritten in 2014 by an article about a ventriloquist who came 7th in a TV talent show and has been a team member in a quiz show. His notability has been questioned since January 2015. I believe the journalist to be the Primary Topic for their shared name. Three of the five incoming links to Steve Hewlett were intended for the journalist - all now fixed. I have also boldly amended the other two article-space links so that they go via the existing redirect at Steve Hewlett (ventriloquist), to simplify this move if it is approved. Pam D  17:21, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Steve Hewlett (journalist) → Steve Hewlett
 * Steve Hewlett → Steve Hewlett (ventriloquist)
 * Well, I assumed that Steve Hewlett (ventriloquist) redirected to Steve Hewlett, but then discovered it was created in June 2013 pointing to List of Britain's Got Talent finalists (series 7), unnoticed by the editor who made the article over the redirect at Steve Hewlett on 31 May 2014! It now targets that article. I suppose that there should have been a hatnote at The Media Show "Steve Hewlett redirects here; for the ventrioloquist see Steve Hewlett (ventriloquist)" created when the ventriloquist redirect was created in June 2013, but it didn't happen. Pam  D  22:42, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm very happy to support the suggested moves - the journalist is clearly the more notable of the two. JezGrove (talk) 20:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment: Before overwriting the history at Steve Hewlett (ventriloquist), there are possible cut-and-paste and copyvio issues to look at. Andrewa (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries there. In fact it would actually be better if that history is deleted as an unattributed copy/paste that was promptly reverted. Jenks24 (talk) 16:50, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Disambiguate both. Agree, that if one must be the PrimaryTopic (which I disagree with), then the wrong one has been chosen.  However, swapping the base title between the two is much more likely to confuse readers, links, external incoming links and bookmarks, than it is to actually help anyone.  These two Steve_Hewlett are famous in independent spheres, and many readers will be familiar with one, but not the other, both ways.  Disambiguating with "(journalist)" or "(ventriloquist)" is not a slight on either, and is very helpful due to disambiguation in hovertext, etc.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:36, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate both per above. A dab is also future-proof, in case someone more famous becomes the primary topic. Laurdecl talk 08:18, 16 February 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.

Move review
User talk:PamD I find the above RM having too few participants and partly flawed arguments 1. to keep the primary topic based on confusing previous readers/incoming links per se 2. a dab being future proof. They aren't convincing per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and I don't think it's recentism to say the journalist is a clear primary topic compared to the borderline notability recent entertainer. I'm uncertain about Move review for this due to having little experience with hndis primary topics, User:Aervanath can you comment? Widefox ; talk 00:00, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi User:Widefox, there's no real minimum participation requirement for move discussions. Regarding the primary topic, that can be a very subjective thing, and there was no evidence proposed in the discussion to say one way or the other which one was more notable. Looking at the |Steve_Hewlett_(ventriloquist)|Steve_Hewlett page view statistics for the three pages, it certainly seems plausible that the journalist might be the primary topic, but that became apparent only after the disambiguation page was created, so it's hard to say. If you can provide more convincing evidence as to the primary topic, then you'd be better off posting the evidence here or at Talk:Steve Hewlett to get a proper evidence-based consensus than to open a wp:move review. However, I will take no offense if you do open a review. Cheers, --Aervanath (talk) 09:40, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks User:Aervanath. Just in terms of the notability, one is clearly notable and the other borderline/non-notable and tagged as such. In that way, I'd assess the default position for these two articles as having a primary topic. But, saying that, as this is a hndis, just like an acronym dab I'd be more cautious. Page views, |Steve_Hewlett|Steve_Hewlett_(ventriloquist) is clear journalist is an order of magnitude higher (recent death excluded), which satisfies PRIMARYTOPIC more likely than all others combined. In fact, the dab is an orphan, and moving the journalist would make it a WP:TWODABS so not needed, which seems the obvious proposal here, done. In terms of lasting encyclopaedic value, it's only the journalist, and one could argue the ventriloquist should be deleted as borderline N/local news sources. Widefox ; talk 11:31, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi user:Widefox, the page view stat is only one of many things that should be considered. I'd say step one would be to nominate the ventriloquist for deletion if you think he's that non-notable. Then there'd be no reason for the dab. If that doesn't pass, you'll need to must some more convincing evidence as to why one is more recognizable than the other; the problem with saying that one is "clearly more notable" than the other is that you haven't provided any actual data to back up the argument. If he actually is the primary topic, it shouldn't be hard to come up with some outside sources to help prove the case.--Aervanath (talk) 23:45, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * For such cases I believe we use consensus per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The main issue of the ventriloquist at the basename has been solved, and now it's tagged for more eyes, these may solve themselves. I'm just highlighting that there's probably some hysteresis - if the journalist was already at the basename, then the ventriloquist probably wouldn't have displaced the primary topic. Thanks for looking at this. Widefox ; talk 11:36, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Steve Hewlett award
According to The Media Show broadcast on August 30 2017, there is now going to be a Steve Hewlett scholarship awarded to some one who wishes to go into broadcast journalism. Could this go into this article? Vorbee (talk) 15:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)