Talk:Doge (title)

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Elli in topic Requested move 16 July 2023

Untitled

edit

I've been told that Doge's couldn't leave Venice at all. I don't know how much truth there is to that claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.197.93.121 (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

This article needs a note on how to pronounce the word - preferably IPA. --Doric Loon 10:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

DL: I'm reading Hazlitt's History of the Venetian Republic at the moment. He says they sometimes led important military expeditions in person. There was another official called the Vice-Doge who watched things back on the block until the Doge returned. The "Doge" page has the pronunciation in English and Italian; maybe you can cut 'n' paste?? Terry J. Carter (talk) 01:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

I've heard "doge" pronounced more often as "douzh" (rhymes with gamboge) in English rather than "doudge." The former is how it's pronounced in The Court Jester. Could this be added as a possible alternate pronunciation in US English? ForestAngel (talk) 21:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Ungrammatical sentence

edit

"Doge elected chief of state lordship, the ruler of the Republic in many of the Italian city states during the medieval and renaissance periods, in the Italian "crowned republics"." I don't know what this is supposed to say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.192.168.253 (talk) 01:50, 11 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Move reverted.

edit

I have reverted the undiscussed move of this article, as it has existed at this title for eleven years, and has hundreds of incoming links. We should be in no hurry to upset its position in favor of a passing Internet meme. bd2412 T 21:46, 11 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Representation in art

edit

The majority of the 'Representation in art' section does not mention the title of 'Doge' at all. It focuses mainly on Venetian art and only mentions the title in the final sentence. I've removed the section given this. Sotakeit (talk) 10:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2017

edit

A typing mistake: At the bottom of the article, beneath the picture of Doge of Genoa Luca Spinola should be 1687-1689, instead of 1551-1553. 185.27.130.28 (talk) 13:59, 4 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 16:52, 4 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Move discussion in progress

edit

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Doge (meme) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:48, 4 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 18 November 2017

edit

I want to add some missing facts that are missing in this passage SuperNova 91 (talk) 23:05, 18 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Considering that your other edits have been vandalism that probably isn't a good idea. But feel free to explain what edit you propose to make ϢereSpielChequers 23:17, 18 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. General Ization Talk 23:19, 18 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 10 December 2020

edit
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: Not moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 05:40, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply


– As evidenced by pageviews, there is no primary topic for the word "doge", with the meme vastly eclipsing the title (161 vs 1734 average pageviews in the last 20 days) but not having as much longterm significance. An attempt to move the meme to primary failed (as it should have), but I believe there is WP:NOPRIMARY. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:24, 10 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

  • Support no clear primary topic so its safest to disambiguate. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:27, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose. Whilst it clear [1] that the meme is more popular in terms of page views, it is equally clear that the Italian title has greater long-term significance than a 21st century meme, and so the status quo should endure. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:46, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Support per nom, long terms significance is just one part of being a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.--Ortizesp (talk) 01:28, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose. Not sure if this is serious. Never heard of the meme. I guess it must mean something to some recent sub-culture on some corner of the internet. But I'm going to go out on a limb and guess it is not likely to ever achieve the wide recognizability nor the staying power of a thousand-year old title of the rulers of one the most significant republics in the history of the world. Walrasiad (talk) 01:52, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Strong Support per WP:DPT, "while long-term significance is a factor, historical age is not a determinative." It is clear that Doge as a title is an obsolete term as you said. Doge as a title only has principal relevance to only a small group of people (especially historians) but not the primary topic especially among a general audience. Plus Doge (meme) is listed as a good article, Doge the title is not. Disambiguation is the best option for both sides here. PyroFloe (talk) 00:20, 14 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
I am not sure who you think "general audience" is, but I'd bet my last long dollar there are a lot more people who have heard of the Doge than this meme. 25 million tourists visit Venice every year, and every one of them will come across references to the doge. And that's, of course, not including general knowledge among reasonably educated people everywhere who haven't set foot there. Indeed, there are currently thousands of articles on Wikipedia that refer to the Doge of Venice and/or Genoa. How many refer to this meme? Heck, is this even noteworthy enough for a Wikipedia article? Shouldn't this be on "Know your Meme" or some other internet trivia list? Walrasiad (talk) 02:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
+1 on the "is this even noteworthy enough for a Wikipedia article?", with an added side of "this silly thing has a name?" --Khajidha (talk) 19:11, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
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.

Requested move 5 July 2023

edit
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: Not moved. Consensus against the second proposal (because Doge (meme) is not the long-term primary topic under WP:PT2). No consensus on the first proposal (based on whether Doge (title) is the primary topic). (non-admin closure) {{replyto|SilverLocust}} (talk) 09:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)Reply


– The meme by the same name has more page views than this page, so it makes sense to move it to the more popular title. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 20:23, 5 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

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.

Requested move 16 July 2023

edit
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. Numerically, both sides have about the same support. However, arguments in favor of the move are stronger.

It's clear that the more commonly-searched term is the meme, while the title is arguably more significant long-term. However, there isn't consensus that the title is so much more significant to outweigh the usage arguments, especially as the meme has had significantly more views for many years. While there would not be consensus for making the meme the primary topic (and that was shot down at a recent RM), there is a clear consensus against there being any primary topic here. (closed by non-admin page mover) Elli (talk | contribs) 18:44, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply


– It has become clear that both the title and the meme apply to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, as the meme applies to criteria 1 (popularity) and the title applies to criteria 2 (long-term significance), so I see this as a good compromise. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 17:38, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

He's talking about WP:PT2: "A topic is primary for a term with respect to long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term.". His despair is understandable.
As to "how do you estimate the significance of the Italian title...", well, from a historical angle, it is highly significant without question. From an WP:RS angle - that is what is found in "reliable, published sources" - it is easily primary. And not only history. People come across the term frequently when reading about art, travel, architecture, etc. From a general popularity angle, well, millions of tourists visit Venice every year - it is one of the most visited cities on earth - and every one of them hears about the "Doge", the Doge's this, the Doge's that. Outside the Pope, it is one of the best-known Italian titles out there. And, oh, many of those general readers, visitors, etc. are very likely to come here to Wikipedia wanting to learn more about it. Why make readers jump through hoops? For an internet meme? Walrasiad (talk) 02:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I couldn't have put it better myself! -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose for the same reasons as above. An internet encyclopedia's pageviews will always be heavily skewed towards internet topics. Srnec (talk) 03:16, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose per WP:RECENTISM/WP:PT2. While the current doge article is a bit meagre, the topic is still primary, specifically in the form of the doge of Venice and to a lesser extent the doge of Genoa. (We can check back in 226 years, though.) —  AjaxSmack  03:23, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Support As with my opinion in the previous discussion, people are vastly overstating the importance of the historical title. The meme was not inspired by the historical title and has no evident relation to it. I don't think there's a clear argument that the title is so important and educational to modern day society that it completely and utterly overshadows the meme beyond a doubt. There can be bias towards Internet topics, but there can also be bias against them due to preconceptions that they are "unencyclopedic". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 04:14, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose. As I said above, the title is the overwhelmingly primary topic in terms of long-term significance. The idea that a meme could take equal precedence to a title which was significant in history for hundreds of years (and no, nobody is "overstating its importance"!) is just thoroughly laughable and makes Wikipedia look ever more stupid. Are we really going to let this encyclopaedia be taken over by pop culture? -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
    A topic does not have to take "equal precedence" for there to be no primary topic, it's just not the thing that most people searching for it would want. Nobody's claiming the meme has equal significance, this is a discussion on whether or not the historical title is primary with regards to people looking for it. The pageview disparity is enormous. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 18:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
    That's because it's WP:RECENTISM! And once again, you seem to be of the mistaken belief that page views are all that matter, when it's been pointed out again and again that they are not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose we just had this conversation the title is overwhelmingly the primary topic in terms of long term significance, there is more to the world than the internet—blindlynx 14:28, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
    if we look at traffic [2] a small minority of readers move on to other pages and only about a fifth of those go to the meme suggesting that this is the primary topic for the term—blindlynx 18:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose. This was just discussed and closed as no consensus. OP would be advised to wait. See WP:THREEOUTCOMES. 162 etc. (talk) 15:27, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose move. Again. We just discussed this a week ago. O.N.R. (talk) 17:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • DEAR CLOSER: please disregard any comments that say "we just discussed this a week ago". That move request was to give the meme Primary Topic. THIS move request is to put a disambiguation page there. Anyone who says "we just discussed this" apparently hasn't even read the proposal. Red Slash 21:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose – reiterating by stand based on the applicability of WP:PT2. Favonian (talk) 17:30, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Support "long-term significance" is not a trump card. Page views at Doge (meme) have been consistently 8-10 times that of Doge for the past 5 years. The page views and WP:RECENTISM arguments balance: the conclusion must be that there is no primary topic. Walt Yoder (talk) 22:32, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
    • You're ignoring the long-term significance aspects! -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:27, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
      • That would mean any archaic term would always automatically get the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC name and every later meaning relegated to parenthetical-DAB or other non-primary pagename. It still sounds like you are thinking this discussion is about whether the title meaning is notable at all, or is more valuable than some other meaning. Nobody is ignoring long-term significance. But many are pointing out that it is only one of the two criteria the guideline lists, and that the criteria do not say this is the one that is definitely the more-important criterion. DMacks (talk) 18:15, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
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.