Talk:Thomas Mair (minister)

Requested move 29 November 2016

 * 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: Moved - as Boleyn said "just because we have another article, doesn't mean minister is no longer WP:PRIMARYTOPIC" and there is WP:Recentism, but there seems to be concensus that there is no primary topic at the moment. Fuortu (talk) 19:31, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

– Now that we have Thomas Mair (murderer), there is no longer a primary topic for "Thomas Mair", so the DAB page should reside at Thomas Mair and the article for the 18th Century minister should be at Thomas Mair (minister). (PS The murderer is obviously heavily featured in the news at the moment but I cannot believe that he will have such long term notability to justify being treated as the primary topic.) MrStoofer (talk) 15:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thomas Mair → Thomas Mair (minister)
 * Thomas Mair (disambiguation) → Thomas Mair
 * Support In ictu oculi (talk) 09:33, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose - why not? That's what we did with Oliver Burke. Unreal7 (talk) 11:03, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think you are actually against the proposal. I think you are in favour of the first part but also in favour of a move for Thomas Mair (murderer), which is a separate issue.--MrStoofer (talk) 11:44, 30 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose Just because we have another article, doesn't mean minister is no longer WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. What evidence is there that they are of roughly equal notability? The murderer is WP:RECENT, but the minister is being written about three centuries later. Boleyn (talk) 12:10, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. The minister does not appear to be a major figure and would likely be obscure to most readers, while the more well-known murderer would meet the page views criteria of the primary topic guidelines but not the significance one. Seems like a good case for disambiguation.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 16:33, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support – there is no primary topic – see the page views; on November 23, the disambiguation page got extremely higher views than the two pages combined, plus, from that date till now, they have all been getting about the same amount of page views, so obviously no clear primary topic.  CookieMonster755   𝚨-𝛀    22:10, 5 December 2016 (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.