Talk:Sam Cook (cricketer, born 1921)

Requested move 23 September 2020

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Primefac (talk) 20:03, 3 October 2020 (UTC) Primefac (talk) 20:03, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

---

• Sam Cook (Gloucestershire cricketer) → Sam Cook (cricketer, born 1921)
• Sam Cook (Essex cricketer) → Sam Cook (cricketer, born 1997)

– Disambiguating by year of birth is much more sensible by county they play/played for. People will know whether they want the current or non-current cricketer, but might not know which one played for Essex. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Sorry Joseph, got to oppose this one per WP:NCPDAB - "Years of birth and death are not normally used as disambiguators". I guess another good argument for going for the team name and not the year is a conversation like this in 5/10/20 years from now: "I remember Sam Cook - didn't he play for Essex? Yes. When was he born? 1995, or maybe a bit later?" Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:01, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support. Absolutely. Birth year is the usual disambiguator with cricketers (and footballers) of the same name. Years of birth and death are not normally used as disambiguators in fact goes on to say this may be necessary when there are multiple people with the same name and tag. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:49, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose As Lugnuts state per WP:NCPDAB, in this situation there's only two Sam Cook cricketers therefore disambiguating with their county of birth and who they played for is probably just suitable. I would say as there is only two it doesn't classify as 'multiple' but if there was to be another Sam Cook cricketer, then it may have to be disambiguated in this way in the future. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 13:24, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

• My point on this is that the dob years are so different (1921 and 1927) that it's easier for people to tell them apart than remember what county they play(ed) for. And calling the current cricketer is a bit presumptuous as he's already played for 2 teams- if he changes teams again, do we have to move his article again? The dob is a fixed disambiguation that is clearer in this instance, in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:59, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

• A fair point, but currently playing Cook's other side was a universities side. I'd imagine far fewer would search for him for that given his Essex career so far, and the fact that he was born in Essex and came through the Essex academy. FWIW rugby union and football tend to disambiguate with year of birth, but the majority of cricket articles i've seen tend to disambiguate with county they played the majority of their career for (see Tom Wood (Derbyshire cricketer), Thomas Wood (Somerset cricketer), Tom Clark (Sussex cricketer) and Tom Clark (Surrey cricketer) as other examples) Rugbyfan22 (talk) 15:13, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

• You've been a bit selective there. Many cricketers are disambiguated by their year of birth. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:01, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

• Seems to be a more recent change then, I must say I don't know when WP:NCPDAB was implicated, but obviously Cook, Clark and Wood have all had pages created in the past few years. I happen to think that disambiguating by sport then year is a better solution, but just following the WP:NCPDAB guidelines. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 11:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

• Which, it must be said, don't actually say that year of birth should not be used as a disambiguator. And they are in practice very often used as disambiguators for all classes of people. -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:52, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

• A fair viewpoint. Changing my view on the subject following these arguments. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support. After listening to the views put forward by other editors, I'm changing my opinion to support. Perhaps the other pages I've suggested (which would have very similar nominations) should have moves for them discussed also. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.