Talk:Jane Carr

Need help from a British editor

This paragraph isn't making sense to me:

Relocating to the United States, following a spell there with the RSC's The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby, she lived with her partner, Mark Arnott in Los Angeles; they have a son, Dashiel. She had a featured part in 1988's Dear John.

As far as I can tell "RSC" is a reference to a theater in London. Why would an actor relocate to the US to play a role in the UK? The Nickleby article isn't helping since Carr isn't mentioned in it. I note the sentence also implies a cause-effect relationship between moving geographic locations and having children. Somehow I don't think it really works that way. —Aladdin Sane (talk) 02:40, 17 November 2009 (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: Move. Cúchullain ^t/c 15:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Jane Carr (post-1950s actress) → Jane Carr – This article was moved last month without adequate discussion. It is not disputed that this person is the primary meaning of "Jane Carr" which redirects here, e.g. she did have an important role in one very well-known film. PatGallacher (talk) 11:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

• Comment if it is to be disambiguated, it should be Jane Carr (born 1950) -- 70.24.250.26 (talk) 11:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Agree, but this begs the question of whether it needs to be disambiguated in the first place. PatGallacher (talk) 12:13, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Either way, that pagename should be a blue-link. -- 70.24.250.26 (talk) 06:06, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
      • Bluelinked. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
• Support. This Jane Carr gets 25-to-30 views a day, the other one around four. "Post-1950s actress" is a most peculiar disambiguator. Kauffner (talk) 15:39, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support per WP:TWODABS. I also think that the disambiguator for the other Carr, Jane Carr (Rita Brunstrom), is a bit clumsy since she was never notable as Bunstrom. What about Jane Carr (born 1909) for her and just Jane Carr for this one with hatnotes to ease navigation? —  AjaxSmack  22:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment that'd be a good redirect for 1909, but wouldn't it normally be Jane Carr (1909-1957) ? -- 70.24.250.26 (talk) 05:00, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
• I support Jane Carr (actress, born 1950) over Jane Carr (born 1950) over Jane Carr because more precision is better for readers, up to maybe 50 characters, certainly not more than one line, as per a standard running title. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:01, 28 November 2012 (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.

Requested move 8 June 2018

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move Jane Carr (actress; 1909–1957) to Jane Carr (actress, born 1909) as requested, and no consensus to move the other two pages at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 02:02, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

---

• Jane Carr → Jane Carr (actress, born 1950)
• Jane Carr (actress; 1909–1957) → Jane Carr (actress, born 1909)
• Jane Carr (disambiguation) → Jane Carr

– Five-and-a-half years after the previous RM, above and the creation, nearly four years ago, of the Jane Carr (disambiguation) page, it does not appear that there is a predominant, internationally renowned personality among the three subjects [if there is one, it may well be Jane Carr (fashion designer)]. The base name at the dab page main header would appear to be the most preferable choice.     Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 04:58, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose 1st/3rd. The page views seem to indicate that the actress is the primary topic[1]. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:42, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
• Neutral 1st/3rd, STRONGLY support 2nd per nom. Haven't formulated an opinion on the "b. 1950" actress being the primary topic, but the formatting of the 2nd's title is oddly inconsistent with other pages, as is (so I strongly support the second move, at least). Paintspot Infez (talk) 13:56, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose 1st/3rd, Support 2nd. The current actress is the overwhelming WP:primary topic. (Reformatting the 1909 actress's qualifier seems uncontroversial though.) Station1 (talk) 18:55, 9 June 2018 (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.