Talk:Britney (disambiguation)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No move. No basis in policy or naming conventions provided in nominating argument (thus also not in any Support votes that simply say, "per nom"). On the other hand, the Oppose argument is strongly based on policy (i.e., WP:PRIMARYTOPIC). Only Support vote to even mention primary topic did not stand up to scrutiny ("poor choice of words") when challenged by Powers. One Support vote was based on the Madonna comparison, but that was debunked too. Discounting the Support arguments accordingly, and by considering consensus of the Wikipedia community as expressed in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, consensus is to not move.

Some support for merge with Brittany, but, again, not based on conventions or policy, and no consensus for that.

By the way, googling for "Britney" at either google.com or google.co.uk results in a page of results that are all related to the singer. Born2cycle (talk) 22:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

---

Britney (disambiguation) → Britney — Currently the latter title redirects to Britney Spears. A look at the history of that title indicates multiple people have disagreed, but been reverted. I personally maintain that Britney is too common of a name to simply push it to Ms. Spears; there are other contexts (including misspellings of Brittany (name)). Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

• Support as per nom. -Uyvsdi (talk) 04:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi
• Oppose - the only two actual disambiguation links on the page not related to Ms Spears appear to be:
  1. Britney Houston, American singer, drag queen and Internet celebrity
  2. Britney Stevens (born 1985), an American pornographic actress

  So unless those two have a notability that I don't know about, and until some other much more notable Britneys get an article, I would have thought Britney Spears is clearly a primary topic.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose - clearly the primary topic for this spelling of the name. Powers ^T 15:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
• Support. I'm really not comfortable with this notion of Britney Spears being the primary topic for this title; if anything, the primary topic is the given name Brittany, for which this is a valid alternative spelling. There are also at least two items here that are just called "Britney". Depending on the outcome of this discussion, perhaps it would be an idea to discuss the target of the redirect at RfD? PC78 (talk) 22:08, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm unclear as to how this is a "valid alternative spelling" of "Brittany". It's obviously derived from that earlier name, but the two names are properly pronounced differently. Powers ^T 22:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
    • A poor choice of words on my part, perhaps, but the two are not sufficiently distinct IMO. PC78 (talk) 00:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
• Comment - I support a merge with Brittany (disambiguation) if this move is accepted. In fact I think it's an important reason behind the move. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
• Support per nom but I also think it should be merged with Brittany (disambiguation), and Britney redirected there. AnemoneProjectors 22:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
• Support there are other usages, and one does not automatically think of Spears, unlike Madonna, and with Madonna being a dab page, I hardly see why this should redirect to Spears. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 04:20, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
  • You can't compare this to "Madonna" because there is another very very prominent usage of the term. The same applies to Brittany, but not to Britney. Powers ^T 14:12, 16 October 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. Consensus appears to support the powers interpretation of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --rgpk (comment) 15:12, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Britney (disambiguation) → Britney – Going to try to take another whack at this. I don't believe Spears is the primary use of "Britney". She is not so well known that when you think of "Britney" you automatically think of her, and her alone ("much more likely than all the others" is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says). She's best known by her full name "Britney Spears," not by her first name solely. When people type in that name into the box, they may also be thinking of the spelling of "Brittany" instead and I believe the confusion is ambiguous enough to warrant a disambig. She may be "more well-known" than the other listed Britneys, but that does not necessarily automatically grant her the title of primary topic. hbdragon88 (talk) 23:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support Spears is not known by one name. 65.94.47.217 (talk) 04:39, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support - Britney Spears is not the primary topic for "Britney". –AnemoneProjectors– 10:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support, Britney being a fairly common name, one would expect, when typing in "Britney" to get a list of people/places named Britney. Rennell435 (talk) 12:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support, for all of the reasons given. Britney Spears does not release records under the name "Britney", but "Britney Spears". The primary topic should be a disambiguation page like any other common name. --Rob Sinden (talk) 14:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose. Spears is clearly the primary topic for this non-traditional spelling. If Madonna had spelled her name "Madawna", I can tell you it would not be a disambiguation page. Srnec (talk) 16:07, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
  • There would not be because there would be nothing else named "Mawdawna". People with completely unique surnames, such as Assange, redirect to the subject we have an article on. Britney, however, is a more common first name than "Mawdawna" would be. hbdragon88 (talk) 22:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support - The singer is usually known as Britney Spears, not as just Britney. So Britney Spears is not the primary topic for Britney. --Carioca (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose; the presence of other 'Brittany's should not affect whether the singer is the primary topic for "Britney". She is. The other uses don't even come close. Powers ^T 01:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Powers gets it. Spelling matters. Srnec (talk) 05:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Neither of you have addressed the argument that she isn't known solely by the name "Britney" as, say, Madonna or Elvis are (Elvis redirects, but Madonna isn't the primary topic). That's another reason why we want "Britney" to be a disambiguation page. hbdragon88 (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
    • That's because the argument is irrelevant. It would be relevant to a proposal to move Britney Spears to Britney, but not to the current proposal. The question before us is not "What name is she most readily known by?" but "What topic is most likely to be sought under the name 'Britney'?" Powers ^T 23:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose per LtPowers. The other articles currently listed on the dab page are an album (by Spears), a documentary (about Spears), a song (referring to Spears) and another song that's actually a redirect to an album article. Of the other people called Britney listed on the dab page, Britney Stevens comes closest to Spears' page views, and Spears still gets about 50 times more views than that article.[1][2] Looks like a clear case of primary topic in my view. Jafeluv (talk) 08:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose as by some way the best known meaning, I had never heard of the other 2 people. It is irrelevant that she is probably more often known by her full name, she is often referred to as plain Britney, Elvis Presley usually used his full name. Misspelling Brittany could happen occasionally but not that often. PatGallacher (talk) 11:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose Chris Crocker put it best: Leave "Britney" alone! Of course she is the primary topic for "Britney". See Britney -wikipedia and Bing. Kauffner (talk) 04:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment that's just wrong. you have to subtract "Britney Spears" from your search. If you don't do that, you get every usage of "Britney Spears", which gives you the wrong idea, since those pages use "Britney Spears". The remaining pages of just Britney are not predominantly about Spears. 65.94.45.185 (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
    • So if you take out the pages about Britney Spears, the rest are not about Britney Spears? Who would have thunk? Kauffner (talk) 19:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
      • Taking out "Britney Spears" just proves that "Britney Spears" is not the primary topic for "Britney", since very few pages on the internet refer to her as just "Britney" instead of "Britney Spears". –AnemoneProjectors– 22:21, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
        • You find some way to take out the relevant hits, so what remains is not relevant. By this test, no topic can ever be primary for any phrase. Kauffner (talk) 04:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support - all of the topic about Britney Spears is not the primary topic of the said singer. ApprenticeFan ^work 09:48, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose - another painful example of how poorly understood WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is. People, please, go read it. As Powers said: The question before us is not "What name is she most readily known by?" but "What topic is most likely to be sought under the name 'Britney'?". Seriously, when someone types "Britney" into the Search box and clicks "Go", do you really think they're likely looking for something other than the singer? Seriously? Like what? Have you even look at the possibilities on the dab page? Have you compared the page view counts? There is no comparison! Yes, getting users to the page they seek quickly and efficiently is about improving the encyclopedia. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support. IMO this is a classic case showing how a DAB s hould be at the undisambiguated name. Yes, I have read WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and don't agree on the interpretation sbove. Andrewa (talk) 08:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.