Talk:Orwell (disambiguation)

Latest comment: 6 years ago by QEDK in topic Requested move 12 March 2018

Talk

edit

User:Bleaney When articles are renamed etc, we still include them in dabs, so an updated version of this lost entry seems worth including unless I'm missing something:

Widefox; talk 21:34, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 12 March 2018

edit
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: moved per consensus. (non-admin closure) --QEDK ( 🌸 ) 06:08, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply


OrwellOrwell (disambiguation) – In the same manner that Hobbes redirects to Thomas Hobbes, Faraday redirects to Michael Faraday, Dickens redirects to Charles Dickens and Einstein redirects to Albert Einstein, so should Orwell redirect to George Orwell. There are 25 entries at the Orwell disambiguation page and, other than some place names, all of them very minor, concern topics derived from George Orwell — Orwellian, Orwell Prize, Orwell Award, the asteroid 11020 Orwell, Orwell (programming language) and Orwell (video game). —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 00:17, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Not in UK it isn't. If Abraham can't displace the East Anglian town of Lincoln, George who isn't a mononyn like Abraham L. shouldn't displace the East Anglian river. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:46, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
That's an incredibly hamfisted search query. Of course you are not going to get results for George if you search "The Orwell is". That's not how humans are referred to. "Orwell is" of course brings George up. Nohomersryan (talk) 09:22, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Does this opposition extend to all last name redirects or specifically to this case, either because there are too many other topics at the Orwell dab page or because George Orwell is insufficiently notable or undeserving? —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 20:02, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
I am not opposed to the general concept, I am opposed because this requested move offered zero evidence to back up the request. Citing other examples is not evidence. -- Netoholic @ 03:20, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
It would be "(sic)" for the mononym "Orwell" if en.wp put "the" in front of Thames. We don't. If we did we could argue the mononym for Thames was José Ignacio Thames. It isn't. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Huh?  AjaxSmack  00:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Support, an obvious case of primary topic redirect for a surname. The guy even has his own adjective. olderwiser 07:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Support, 28 daily views for the river, over 5500 for the author, so it's WP:CRYSTAL of me to think that more people than not who are looking for 'Orwell' want George (and many of those probably don't remember his first name and just search for 'Orwell'). I learned about the river though, and it's well loved, and Eric Blair did it justice by using its name as his own. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:10, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
    ...and I had to tell somebody this, it has to be other Wikipedians because non-editors wouldn't "get it". I just created Orwel and redirected it to George Orwell, and am a little surprised it hadn't been created before. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:18, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

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.