Talk:William Timmons (lobbyist)

Requested move 25 February 2023

 * 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. No consensus to move William Timmons (lobbyist); rough consensus to move William Timmons. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 02:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

– Back in 2019 there was an undiscussed primary-topic grab from this much more notable William Timmons in favor of the SC politician, via WP:RMTR. This should be summarily undone, but it's been a while, so let's discuss. Dicklyon (talk) 03:57, 25 February 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 05:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * William Timmons (lobbyist) → William Timmons
 * William Timmons → William Timmons (politician)
 * Oppose pageviews |William_Timmons clear In ictu oculi (talk) 16:56, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above comment. Station1 (talk) 04:00, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * So much for long-term significance. A primarytopic grab tends to go that way. Dicklyon (talk) 04:27, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Not that familiar with either guy. What makes the lobbyist much more notable? He seem obscure. --Quiz shows 19:43, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * What makes him more notable is the decades of coverage he got in the press, for his work with many presidential administrations, before he became a lobbyist (which is not a good disambiguator for him). Not that I like the guy (I don't). Dicklyon (talk) 11:02, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose 1st, Support 2nd and create a disambiguation page at the basename. No clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Ugh, I'm torn. DuckDuckGo results are overwhelmingly the politician, even when I arbitrarily limit the results to 2017 through 2022. On the other hand, I see no harm in Necrothesp's proposal. A dab at the base name could yield some WikiNav data that may help. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:11, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The only harm, admittedly minor, in putting a two-entry dab page at the base name is that a reader searching for "William Timmons" will wind up somewhere other than at the article they immediately expect, and will need to unnecessarily click through a dab page. There is no off-setting benefit to the small minority looking for the lobbyist because they click through a hatnote as easily as they would click through a dab page. Station1 (talk) 08:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment: Consensus against the first proposal, but there may be a consensus for the second. Relisting for additional discussion on moving William Timmons to William Timmons (politician) and creating a dabpage at William Timmons BilledMammal (talk) 05:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Leaning toward support for the 2nd article move: There is a major WP:RECENTISM factor here. The lobbyist is 92 years old and retired, and the politician is 38 and currently holding office. 54 years from now when the politician is 92, he may be largely forgotten. A quick look at the two articles does not show any extra-special distinguishing accomplishments (or embarrassments) for the politician that would outlast those of the lobbyist in the long term. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)