Talk:Memphis (disambiguation)

Redirect

This page should not redirect to Memphis, Tennessee, but rather to Memphis (disambiguation). The ancient Egyptian city Memphis (Egypt) is at least as famous, if not moreso, than the American city. unsigned comment by User:DaveOinSF 00:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

There are currently 124 articles that link to Memphis. At at a quick glance, I'd say all but a dozen of them mean Memphis, Tennessee. This page should redirect to Memphis, Tennessee, with a redirect warning on that page back to Memphis (disambiguation). Colonies Chris 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think so, too. I am in the process of disambiguating the links to Memphis, once I am done with that, I am going to move that page to Memphis (disambiguation). Memphis gets a redirect to Memphis, Tennessee after that is done. doxTxob \ ^talk 01:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Completed. I have disambiguated all but a dozen of links to Memphis and moved the page to Memphis (disambiguation). The remaining links to Memphis are logs and archives. Memphis now redirects to Memphis, Tennessee, that page has a link to the disambiguation page place at the top. doxTxob \ ^talk 03:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Consensus (with which I agree) was established above to have this dab page point to the Memphis, Tennessee article, all the work was done and the link changed accordingly, but now it's been changed again without discussion here? What's up with that? --Unflappable (talk) 02:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and moved the dab page back to Memphis (disambiguation) and made Memphis a redirect to Memphis, Tennessee, per the above discussion/consensus. --Unflappable (talk) 00:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The usage supports this way of organising the redirects/disambiguation. There are currently 31 articles pointing to Memphis; of those, two are obviously for Memphis, Egypt and the rest are almost certainly intended for Memphis, Tennessee. Colonies Chris (talk) 19:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't be daft. Of course it should redirect to Memphis, Egypt. Memphis, Egypt is a UNESCO world heritage site, while Memphis, Tennessee is a medium-size US city. How are the two even comparable? --131.111.200.200 (talk) 23:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Current wikipedia links are hardly evidence of anything in the real world, are they? When did where links point to become a reason for deciding where an article redirects to? john k (talk) 00:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we have anything we could label "consensus" here. We've three editors arguing that the page should redirect to the Tennessee Memphis and three questioning/arguing against this.

I agree with John that the current wikilinks are a pretty poor reason for deciding where to point the redirect ... in the long run that is. Currently we've got somewhere between 200 & 250 incoming links. Most of them are for the Tennessee Memphis but not all of them.

Certainly, in the short term, this is good reason to keep things the way they are. However, there is an inherant circularity involved when you try to extend this argument to the long term. The very fact that this page redirects to the Tennessee Memphis encourages people to link here when that article is what they want.

In the long term we should hope to get those links pointing directly to the correct articles. Eventually we shouldn't have any more than about half a dozen links pointing here (i.e. those that actually want this page).

That done, we can then consider what should be done with this. It seems there are four options:

1. redirect to Memphis, Tennessee (i.e. leave it as is)
2. redirect to Memphis, Egypt
3. redirect to Memphis (disambiguation)
4. merge Memphis (disambiguation) here (much the same effect as option 3 just simpler)

The Egyptian Memphis, the older and internationally, historically and culturally more significant of the two, is the primary meaning of Memphis. The American Memphis, named after the Egyptian, is secondary. If this page should redirect to either, my vote is for the Egyptian.

However, the better solution might be to redirect to the disambiguation page. This is a fair compromise between options 1 & 2. But if we're doing that, of course, we might wonder why there is a disambig page at all. So a simpler solution would be to make this the disambig page.

Thus, if we're voting, the order of my prefs is options 4, 3, 2 then 1. JIMp _talk·cont 04:46, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not convinced the Egyptian city should be seen as the primary topic. Among other things, it hasn't been inhabited for the last 1300 years or so. john k (talk) 06:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Jimp on this 100%. I typed in Memphis looking for the ancient city...didn't even know there was another Memphis! The current redirect to Memphis, Tennessee needs to be addressed. Okay, there's obviously a modern city in the United States with the name Memphis, but it can't be nearly as famous as the original, so it definitely shouldn't be the primary topic. If there are equitable arguments for the other side (and I'm sure there are; wikilinks and so forth, as discussed above) "Memphis" should be a dab page. If not, it should redirect to the ancient Egyptian city. Night w (talk) 11:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

If no one has any objections, I'll make the move. Night w (talk) 03:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm extraordinarily dubious of the contention that the Tennessee Memphis is "not nearly as famous" as the ancient Egyptian city. Within the United States, it is far, far more famous. Outside the United States, the Egyptian city may be more famous, but the much greater fame of the American city within the US at the very least counteracts that. That being said, I think the comparative fame levels are comparable enough that I'd somewhat prefer this redirecting to the disambiguation, or the disambiguation page being moved here. Especially since the article on the US city is going to be at Memphis, Tennessee, regardless. It's not a big deal, but I think that would be preferable. john k (talk) 06:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll make the move now. Night w (talk) 13:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Never heard of it? It's the 20th largest city in the United States. It's the birthplace of Rock and Roll. Elvis became famous here. Sun Studios is here. It's quite arguably one of the most famous cities in the world, so lets say that I'm more than a little "dubious" of the idea that Memphis is "not famous".

Memphis, Egypt, on the other hand, is quite less famous by a long shot. So much so that visitors to Memphis, TN often ask locals why we made the arena in the shape of a Pyramid. -- Otto (talk) 18:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I generally agree. I came here looking for the Egyptian city, but that's because I was specifically researching the history of ancient Egyptian capitals. In terms of general interest, a city populated by half a million modern people with multiple significant recent contributions to world history and culture and a major regional tourist destination is far more likely to be of interest to a given Wikipedia user than an abandoned city relevant only in the contexts of ancient history or archaeology. It may be more reasonable to point Memphis to the dab, and maybe there's additional evidence out there to show that Memphis, Egypt is really what most Wikipedians are looking for, but lacking that evidence, it seems unreasonable to simply declare the dead city more culturally significant or "primary" as though it's a matter of common sense. Elmo iscariot (talk) 13:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Move request on dab

Talk:Memphis (disambiguation)#Requested move should have been announced here, since the proposal is to move the disambiguation page to Memphis. Currently, Memphis → Memphis, Tennessee. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

This is a joke, right?

Ok, first of all, I'd like someone to show me proof that the intent of people to when typing in "Memphis" is to go to Memphis, TN.

Second, (and this is undisputable) kids will study ancient history before they study two paragraphs on Rock N' Roll (or the educational system is seriously dead), thus, they will try to find info on MEMPHIS, EGYPT. When they see some city in TN, they will either mistakenly write about that city (getting an F in their project), or they will not click the disambiguation link because they won't see it, being kids and all, and go to a different site.

Oh, another thing. The reason why GOOGLE goes to Memphis is because THERE ARE MORE LINKS TO A LARGE MODERN CITY IN A DEVELOPED COUNTRY than there are to a historical place of great significance in a DEVELOPING country...

--Agamemnus (talk) 01:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I brought this up about a year ago. The main argument to keep the U.S. city as the primary topic was traffic stats. Nightw 11:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

But those stats don't say anything about where people intend to go, as far as I can tell.. just how many people go to one article or another. Also, how many of those are bots?--Agamemnus (talk) 18:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I didn't think that bots were counted, but I'll admit my knowledge of how those stats are ascertained is pretty poor. If you think you could pull it off, you could lodge another move request for Memphis → Memphis (disambiguation). Searching for "Memphis" at other online publications like Encyclopedia.com, Britannica, Encarta and Yahoo leads to disambiguation, so I don't know why Wikipedia should be any different. Nightw 06:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not a joke. Users are far more likely to be searching for Memphis, TN. What with it being a large active city, a primary transportation hub of most of the country, the primary and undisputable shipping hub for all of the country, (if not the world, what with FedEx and all), and with huge cultural significance in music, art, film, etc... None of which are the case for an ancient and *dead* city in Egypt that is only of interest to historians. We don't determine what makes up the primary topic based on what school-children are searching for.

From WP:PRIMARYTOPIC: "Although a term may potentially refer to more than one topic, it is often the case that one of these topics is highly likely - much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined - to be the subject being sought when a reader clicks the "Go" button for that term. If there is such a topic, then it is called the primary topic...."

BTW, those other searches on those other sites lead to disambig pages because *all* searches on those sites lead to disambig pages. Unless you think "New York" needs a disambig page too: Encyclopedia.com, Britannica, Encarta and Yahoo

Memphis, TN is much more likely to be the term actually being searched for. Simple as that. -- Otto (talk) 07:27, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me, aren't you supposed to be assuming good faith? The issue has been raised numerous times in the past and will likely be brought up again by a different editor in the near future. Your outright labelling of these editors' arguments as "trolling" and of their reasonable suggestions as "biased" is a violation of WP:CIVIL. An apology is in order. Nightw 09:53, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Nice, I'm trolling. First of all, the discussion page for the move did not create a consensus. The major point, stemming from both the fact that there's no actual evidence that people who typed in "Memphis" mostly wanted to see "Memphis, Tennessee", and that Memphis, Egypt is historically the more important city, is this:

Making decisions based on rough statistics and very general "inconvenience" is not something anyone in any field should strive for as a real analysis. When you talk about inconveniencing users, you may inconvenience those looking for Memphis, Tennessee by a few seconds (if Memphis went to a disambiguation page), but little kids who search for Memphis, Egypt may be "completely" inconvenienced (if it went to Memphis, TN), and close the page. Thus, one should err on the side of caution. --Agamemnus (talk) 19:24, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you're trolling. Or did you not start off with "This is a joke, right"? Sure sign of a troll: When they insult the opposition before even trying to make a case.

Nightw: It's very difficult for me to assume good faith when the issue is only raised by a couple of people, the stats are completely against them, and they're using phrases like these, strange and unsupported arguments, and making grandiose claims and then calling them "undisputable" and similar. I did not assume good faith because evidence in the above discussion is explicitly contrary to "good faith".

If you want to have a real discussion, then start off by bringing up points in favor of discussion. But saying "school kids are more likely to be searching for Memphis, Egypt" is not only unsupportable on the face of it, but irrelevant to the point at hand in the first place. Going on to claim that Google searches are the reasoning and such when that is not in fact the case is silly.

The reason this page redirects to Memphis, TN is because Memphis, TN is more likely to be what is being searched for. If you have evidence to the contrary, then please present it. Claiming that more people are searching for a dead city of the ancient world which has little or no significance to anybody but historians is an extraordinary claim, and that assertion requires some form evidence to back it up. You have presented no serious evidence in favor of your argument. And until you do, yes, I'd say you're trolling. -- Otto (talk) 19:45, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

You're treading a very thin line with incivility, Otto. This has been the subject of discussion previously, not only and issue raised by a couple of people. older ≠ wiser 20:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Bkonrad: I'm not the one being uncivil here. I would encourage you to re-read the conversation, with an eye towards the weasel words and tone used by these two. If they want to have a real discussion, then they should bring up points worthy of discussion instead of simply presenting their opinions as if they were facts. -- Otto (talk) 20:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

What do you think?

frist sorry for my weak english language I think this is better and the main page remains a reference to all the things that refer to Memphis, not the United States city, because the city of Memphis-United States, wasn't the first to be named as the first direction of the Memphis main page. Truly I say to you, it was first to be directed towards the main page of the page, the city of the exile of Egypt, for it is the first to be named by that name.

• User talk:Mr big tut 31 January 2017 (UTC)

It's fine to ask the question, but please don't make such changes on your own, as it will be reverted. Memphis, Tennessee is considered to be the Primary Topic for Memphis on Wikipedia, which basically means it's the mostly likely topic readers are looking for when they type in "Memphis". While you're free to disagree with that decision, you are not free to make the change with out a clear agreement from other Wikipedia users first. That's called a consensus, and can only be changed through the discussion process. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 09:12, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Memphis (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:15, 4 September 2018 (UTC)