Talk:Derek Dooley (American football)

Semiprotect

{{editsemiprotected}} This is an article that is being vandalizing!BLUE_DOG^TN 18:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

You seem to be confused. This template is for requesting that a semiprotected article be edited on your behalf. The place to request that a page be semiprotected is WP:RPP. Algebraist 18:57, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Article title

This article has bounced around a bit today, including between Derek Dooley (football coach) and Derek Dooley (American football coach). I agree with the use of the word American in the article name. The disambiguation is needed from Derek Dooley (footballer), who is connected with association football (or soccer, for American readers). Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sportspeople) has the convention that soccer players who are not American or Canadian are referred to as footballers, and athletes connected with American football should have American football as the disambiguation text.

Accordingly, while I think Derek Dooley (American football) would also be an acceptable title, Derek Dooley (American football coach) does the job very well—and better than Derek Dooley (football coach). —C.Fred (talk) 22:09, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the title should be Derek Dooley (American football coach). It has all the information needed in the title to accurately guide readers and editors to the proper article, which is the point. TheTito ^Discuss 10:19, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

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. 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: no consensus. There isn't consensus here that either is the primary topic, all things considered. I'm not sure how to conclude from WP:TWODABS that one topic must be the primary. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

---

• Derek Dooley (American football) → Derek Dooley
• Derek Dooley → Derek Dooley (disambiguation)

– There are two Derek Dooleys with articles: Derek Dooley (American football) and Derek Dooley (footballer). Derek Dooley (American football) is the primary topic, as it has gotten over 5,000 page views this month while Derek Dooley (footballer) has been viewed less than 600 times in the same period. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 19:43, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose an utterly unhelpful change to an already confusing situation. I propose this arrangement instead, to help all readers everywhere:

• Derek Dooley (American football)
• Derek Dooley (soccer)
• Derek Dooley

Compare, by the way, these Dereks and these Dereks. I'm sure neither of our Dereks will be lonely. ♥

Noetica^Tea? 00:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

• I oppose this counterproposal. Association football is referred to as just football throughout Wikipedia; soccer would be unnecessary United States bias. —C.Fred (talk) 01:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

So make it Derek Dooley (association football). See all these articles, especially Association football. This is an encyclopedia for the world; and the world means many things by "football". Noetica^Tea? 02:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

You want to make Derek Dooley a redlink? Not even a redirect? How is that going to cut down on confusion? AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 03:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Making it a redlink is harmless. Anyone searching on Google will find the Wikipedia article they are after, accurately labelled. Same for anyone searching within WP, in the search box at the top right of this screen. They will see prompts for each of the two article, with helpful precision. And they will not be presented with a simple prompt "Derek Dooley", which would be useless to them and misleading. Noetica^Tea? 03:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Regardless, I think there is no way that it could become a redlink. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 03:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

• Why is it an utterly unhelpful change? AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 02:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Because it studiously avoids making the situation blindingly obvious to any reader anywhere, at a glance. Without harm, without cost of any sort. Noetica^Tea? 02:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Are you saying that in any case where two or more people have the same name, the name itself should be a link to the dab page and the other articles should have specifications in parentheses? AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 03:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

No, I'm saying that the proposed arrangement is extremely unhelpful to actual readers in the real world, and so is the present arrangement. I oppose changes that simply substitute one uncertainty for another. For that reason, I proposed an alternative that removes all confusion. Noetica^Tea? 03:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

In that case, I'd like to hear your thoughts on WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 03:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

And on why we shouldn't follow Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sportspeople) in this situation. —C.Fred (talk) 03:35, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

On the guideline WP:PRIMARYTOPIC I have many opinions. First of all this: most people don't read it accurately. Many rush to find a primary topic on the slenderest grounds, regardless of the policy imperative at WP:TITLE: help the readers, not editors.

On Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sportspeople), please show us how it can be applied to this case. The provisions that seem most applicable are unclear, when the two sportspeople play football in different codes. And when you've done that, show how the result of applying those provisions would help our worldwide readership (that policy imperative, again).

Noetica^Tea? 22:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

• Weak support. If he were still head coach at Tennessee, it would be easier to say that he's the obvious target. Even so, I still think he's the more likely topic; I'm just not quite as convinced that it's overwhelmingly so. —C.Fred (talk) 01:07, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose. Might be the primary topic in the United States, but not elsewhere, and also falls under WP:RECENTISM. The footballer (the normal disambiguator for soccer players outside North America is "footballer", by the way, not "soccer" or "association football", not at all confusing since American football players are not called footballers) was considered important enough to be honoured with an MBE, which is relatively rare. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

• Weak oppose. The American football coach is probably the more likely topic (current usage), but I'm not so sure about the greater long-term significance. I don't think there's enough there to say confidently that either is really the primary topic. Therefore, retain the current structure. cmadler (talk) 16:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

• Un-emphatic support - as long as at the top of the football coach's page, we put one of those little italicized banners (that I'm sure have a name but whose name isn't coming to mind) that says this article is about the American football coach, if you're looking for the association footballer, see... Go Phightins! 17:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
• Support. One article or the other should be primary, per WP:TWODABS. Kauffner (talk) 15:13, 27 January 2013 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Derek Dooley (American football). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150401001943/http://www.utsports.com/sports/m-footbl/fball-history/fb-history-gbg-lead.html to http://www.utsports.com/sports/m-footbl/fball-history/fb-history-gbg-lead.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130209021146/http://www.wbir.com/news/article/242199/29/Volquest-Dooley-out-as-head-coach-press-conference-Sunday-afternoon to http://www.wbir.com/news/article/242199/29/Volquest-Dooley-out-as-head-coach-press-conference-Sunday-afternoon

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:28, 9 September 2017 (UTC)