 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Requested move
edit- 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.
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:17, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Jovian → Jovian (disambiguation) – I believe that Jovian should redirect to Jupiter, as the most common usage of the word is to refer to attributes of the planet. Powers T 14:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose The top ten results on Google Books are all over the map. Sure, the planet Jupiter is the top referent. But science fiction usage gets almost as many results as the real world planet -- and we have a page that addresses the science fiction issue directly. There are also two references to "Jovian planets", i.e. the gas giant class of planets, and well as two for the emperor. Kauffner (talk) 18:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose This is one reason we avoid having article titles that are adjectives. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:02, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Er, what is? Powers T 23:58, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- So that readers expect the article on Jupiter (both of them) to be there, not at Jovian. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:22, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, maybe I'm just dense today, but I still have no idea what you mean. Do you mean that if we redirect an adjective to its corresponding noun, that readers might start to expect articles to have adjectival titles? Powers T 13:06, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
- No, the other way around; since we don't use adjectives as titles, with only the rarest of exceptions, readers will not expect Jovian to be an article on Jupiter, either Jupiter. (People who don't have any idea what Jovian means, or that it is an adjective, should consult wiktionary.) Jovian would be a harmless redirect if it didn't have a primary sense as a proper name; but it does: the Emperor. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, maybe I'm just dense today, but I still have no idea what you mean. Do you mean that if we redirect an adjective to its corresponding noun, that readers might start to expect articles to have adjectival titles? Powers T 13:06, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
- So that readers expect the article on Jupiter (both of them) to be there, not at Jovian. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:22, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- I would support moving this article to make way for the Emperor; but I don't want to confuse the issue. A multimove request may follow, if this is supported during discussion. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:14, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
- There was no consensus for that last month. Powers T 15:42, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
- Er, what is? Powers T 23:58, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose The Roman Emperor is more likely to be sought. Marcus Qwertyus 10:30, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. Could also easily refer to the god, gas planets, emperor, as said above. It just refers to too many things and I doubt people typing in "Jovian" would be expected to end up at the planet article. Rennell435 (talk) 16:35, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose, the adjectival form is simply too ambiguous. older ≠ wiser 23:43, 13 August 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.