Rename disambiguation page

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.

The result of the proposal was move both pages. Mindmatrix 13:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

The current article at Newmarket is one of three sufficiently and equally prominent locations with that name. Per Wikipedia:Disambiguation and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages), none of these satisfies the criteria of primary usage, hence the plain page title should be used as the disambiguation page. The current article at Newmarket should thus be moved to Newmarket, Suffolk, which currently redirects to Newmarket, to prepare for this. Mindmatrix 20:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Comments

edit

Please submit extended comments about the page move here.

There are a few differences here. WP:CANSTYLE contains the naming conventions used by Canadian editors, which does not include a restriction of naming articles as Placename, Province as there is with the US placename articles (see convention). Thus, Newmarket, Ontario is a viable candidate to be named Newmarket, and hence this discussion is quite valid.
Further, whereas the discussion for Worcester may have gone one way, that for Windsor was quite different. Also, simply because a place has existed for a long time does not imply it is historically significant; it's just old. To be significant, it should have had lasting influence beyond its borders. To use an example from the discussion you mentioned, Jerusalem and Babylon are historically significant for this reason. So are Rome, Ankara and Beijing. In my opinion, neither Worcester nor Newmarket qualify, and a dab page is desirable. Mindmatrix 23:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
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.

Proposed merge for New Market and Newmarket

edit

I would like to combine the DABs for New Market and Newmarket.

  • I think it would make searching easier.
  • Etymologically the two are the same.
  • It leads to simplifying other DABs such as New Market Historic District, which I would also like to combine, but will leave that aside for now (or take to its own talk page).

I propose:

The reasoning for this specific proposal is that New Market (disambiguation) is already clearly a disambiguation page from its title, whereas the other three are not; they can be redirected to it but it then still allows others to argue PRIMARY for any of them.

In the alternate, at least I would like to move the Newmarket disambiguation page to Newmarket (disambiguation) i.e. reverse the redirect, which then allows for discussing whether there is a primary topic for Newmarket. I would argue that Newmarket, Suffolk is primary as the "world home of horse racing" but that argument can be made separately, and while I doubt any other UK place would be claimed as primary, other places around the world might be, hence presumably the situation we have now in the first place.

Has anyone any views on this? I will point here from the other DAB pages. Please excuse the overlinking here but I wanted to be quite clear exactly which articles I meant.

Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 06:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)Reply