Talk:Tom Collins (rugby, born 1895)
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Requested move 10 May 2020
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 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: Not moved. Sceptre (talk) 07:35, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
Tom Collins (rugby) → Thomas John Collins – There are two articles about rugby players named Tom Collins: Tom Collins (rugby) and Tom Collins (rugby union). These Tom Collinses are different people, not least because they lived about a century apart. Still, the disambiguation is not clear enough, as both articles state they are rugby union players and the article rugby union even states the sport is commonly called rugby. This article should be moved to the rugby player's real name Thomas John Collins, as it appears the other guy was actually named simply Tom Collins. JIP | Talk 12:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME, I'd recommend disambiguating by birthyear or nationality, or whatever rugby uses to disambiguate.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- "Thomas John Collins" was just a suggestion for a clearer article title, the main point is to get a better disambiguation than "rugby" vs. "rugby union" which pretty much refer to the same sport. Disambiguation by birth year is certainly a possibility. JIP | Talk 17:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. We don't use full names like this. Propose Tom Collins (rugby, born 1895) and Tom Collins (rugby union, born 1994) as the standard disambiguators. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Support this suggestions from Necrothesp. Skeene88 (talk) 20:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- As I said above, only the current situation is unacceptable. Disambiguating by birth year is fine. However, I still don't understand the difference between "rugby" and "rugby union". JIP | Talk 23:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- One only played rugby union, so we use "rugby union", the other played both codes (rugby union and rugby league), so we only use "rugby". This is just the usual way of doing it. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
- For clarity, and agreeing with the directly above, (rugby) is the disambiguator for a player of both codes of rugby. If anyone is seeking to overturn that long term position I would look to raise it at both the rugby league and rugby union projects.Fleets (talk) 20:12, 18 May 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.
Requested move 23 May 2020
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 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: pages moved. (non-admin closure) ~SS49~ {talk} 14:26, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
- Tom Collins (rugby) → Tom Collins (rugby, born 1895)
- Tom Collins (rugby union) → Tom Collins (rugby union, born 1994)
My previous move nomination was closed as "not moved". Still I think "(rugby)" vs. "(rugby union)" is not good enough to disambiguate two completely different people who lived a century apart, especially as the names "rugby" and "rugby union" can be confused. User:Necrothesp suggested better move targets, so I am proposing a move to them. JIP | Talk 13:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Obviously, given I suggested it! Clearly no disambiguation at all at the moment. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:16, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
- Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia promotes the spurious idea the two completely separate sports are actually two versions of the same thing. If the reader isn't completely aware of this fact, confusion sets in. There seems little interest in addressing this problem, so using (rugby) seems to fit in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.150.71.154 (talk) 22:25, 23 May 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.