Talk:Jágr (surname)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. --BDD (talk) 23:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Jágr (surname) → Jágr – I recently moved Jágr, a list of three people, to a disambiguation page and redirected Jágr to Jaromír Jágr's page. Stats:

• Jaromír Jágr - 270338 pageviews in the last 90 days.
• Martin Jágr - 665 views in the last 90 days.
• Jaroslav Jágr - 570 views in the last 90.

I thought that was a pretty clear primary topic, I don't know about you. Just like with Obama, Churchill, Stalin, or even Gretzky, when there's this lopsided a ratio in notability and popularity, I don't think we need the whole requested move process. So I redirected Jágr to Jaromír Jágr. Someone complained on my talk page so I posted this RM. I strongly oppose the move and support keeping the pages Jágr and Jagr as redirects to Jaromír Jágr. Lol. Red Slash 23:55, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

• Red Slash was requested politely by WP:BRD to restore the move to Jágr (disambiguation) and should have first done so. One of the reasons for doing so, apart from what WP:BRD says, and that he was asked to do so, is that Jágr is evidently a Czech surname article - not a disambiguation page. I have temporarily moved it to Jágr (surname) though am not clear what should happen next. Per WP:BRD rather than arguing a RM from this starting position, the RM should be closed and Red Slash can put in a RM properly. There are several good reasons for following process, and minimizing disruption and wrong-end RMs from WP:RM ... also WP:BRD and process are more important than the actual surname list. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose NEUTRAL - since this RM starts from Jágr. No policy or evidence has been presented above to justify this move, or justify that "Jágr" is a mononym. And this surname is clearly not comparable with a name frequently used as a mononym such as "Stalin." As for Talk:Gretzky (disambiguation) there's no reason for that either, see RM there. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:24, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

• Keep Jagr as a redirect clearly Jagr most commonly refers to Jaromir. The nominator listed several other examples of similar redirects. I don't see what the big deal is. Hot Stop talk-contribs 01:17, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
• Keep Jagr as a redirect There are only 3 Jagrs on the English Wikipedia, and Jaromir is obviously the most well known. I don't see a huge problem with this redirect. Canuck^{89 (have words with me)} 03:06, August 14, 2013 (UTC)
• Keep Jagr as a redirect per Canuckian. Dbrodbeck (talk) 03:13, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Seriously? Are we now going to have WP:PRIMARYSURNAME for every family name in Category:Czech-language surnames, Category:German-language surnames, Category:French-language surnames and move all surname articles to (surname)? How about some policy support for this move? In ictu oculi (talk) 03:49, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

?? I am beyond baffled. I am flabbergasted. What is the point? Seriously, what is the point?? 100 to 1, In ictu oculi. 100 to 1. Krzyzewski, Obama and a host of other surnames where the primary topic ain't the surname all go straight to the article the reader is almost certainly looking for. Again, 100 to 1. Red Slash 04:03, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Also, the guideline backing this is Wikipedia:Redirect, check out the first section, right around the fifth bullet point. Red Slash 04:26, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes I saw the guideline about an hour ago, which is why I mentioned Hitler on the other RM. But the issue again is the notability needed to acquire mononym status.

* Less specific forms of names, for which the article subject is still the primary topic. For example, Hitler redirects to Adolf Hitler, whereas Johnson is a disambiguation page rather than a redirect, since no Johnson is regarded as the primary topic for that name.

I suppose part of the issue here is that I personally just don't think that a sportsman can have the worldwide first rights on a surname the way Hitler does. Beckham, Navratilova, don't occupy the redirect. Why should Jaromír Jágr occupy Jágr? And again, usage in print sources doesn't suggest mononym status like Hitler or Stalin. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:16, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Look at the pageview stats - Jaromir gets 400x the pageviews as compared to the other Jagrs. I'd say that satfisfies WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in terms of disambiguation, regardless of whether this is a surname. Canuck^{89 (have words with me)} 08:08, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

• Keep it as redirect Jaromir is clearly the primary topic and Jagr should really be redirecting there. -DJSasso (talk) 13:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Djsasso - fair enough, I changed the oppose to neutral, but cannot in conscience fully follow you as Talk:Gretzky (disambiguation). I don't believe anyone outside Canada has heard of this player and therefore he is not of the same mononym-level notability status as Gretzky. Also retain some concern that we'll be playing "hunt the most notable sportsman" with every surname article on en.wp. And suggest that moving surname articles away from the surname always require a RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:20, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

You are aware he played most of his career in the United States right? Dbrodbeck (talk) 18:33, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

And is a superstar in his native country and was a star in Russia. -DJSasso (talk) 12:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Maybe, be that as it may I don't see "Jagr" being used as free currency like "Gretzky" (which I admit was a wrong call) in print sources, and unlike Gretzky, Biden or Mondale this isn't a name unique to one family. This is a common Czech family name as cs:Jágr indicates and a surname article is more appropriate. This will clearly pass, but I do not think it should be unanimous, or all hell could break loose on surname articles. This sort of move needs to go via a RM. It's quite a claim to say that one person's uses of his/her surname is more important than the surname itself. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Sigh, I didn't think that primary topic really had anything to do with importance. Can I quote? "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to usage, if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term." And this move's adherence to that standard is something I will defend to the death (metaphorically!!). Red Slash 23:10, 19 August 2013 (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.