Talk:Harold Abbott (rugby union)

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance).

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rugby union Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rugby union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rugby unionWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby unionTemplate:WikiProject Rugby unionrugby union articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 29 September 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 (non-admin closure) Celia Homeford (talk) 13:37, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– The seven-sentence stub for the 1905–06 rugby union player lacks status of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:58, 29 September 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 19:44, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support The rugby union player does get more views but its not a WP:2DABS situation as there are other entries and also the Harry Abbott DAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There is only one other article and the rugby union player gets over 80% of the views.[1] - Station1 (talk) 06:56, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone searching for any "Harold Abbott" (including the fictional characters from Saw (franchise) or from the TV series Everwood) would type "Harold Abbott" and wind up at the rugby player's article. The rugby player competed for one season in New Zealand over 110 years ago and has rated only a 7-sentence stub. Harold Abbott (artist) actually seems more notable, but if page views were the determining standard every disambiguation page would feature a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC since each dab features someone who has more page views than someone else. However, as we all know, most dab pages have no primary topic. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 07:22, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Virtually no one is typing "Harold Abbott" looking for the fictional characters; the 3 of them combined had a total of 12 hits over the past 90 days. The artist is somewhat more popular, and while one might subjectively consider an artist to be more notable than a sports figure, if one values art above sports, objective data shows 4-5 times as many people are actually searching for the rugby union player, and fewer than 10% of those who land on his article don't want to be there. As a navigation aid, the current setup helps more people than the proposal, although adding the artist directly to the hatnote would help even more, by cutting out one step for the 10% who don't want this article. Station1 (talk) 07:49, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the main point is that if we were to consider the number of page views as the sole determining factor, every single dab page would have a primary topic. Although the artist's article is not a stub and is more detailed than than of the rugby player, he is not being proposed as the primary topic over the rugby player and a separate hatnote for the artist atop the rugby player's article is not warranted. The central question is, however, how can a stub for a rugby player whose sole notability consists of briefly competing more than a century ago be considered in any way primary? Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:16, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It can be considered primary because more readers want that article than the other one. Primary does not mean one topic is better or more important than another, or that one article is better written than another. The central question for me is, How would turning Harold Abbott into a dab page benefit readers? Most readers get to whatever article they want no matter what we title them; for those readers there would be no difference. For those who search for or link to "Harold Abbott" wanting the artist, whether they click on a dab page or hatnote also makes no difference. The only ones affected would be those who search for or link to "Harold Abbott" wanting the rugby union player, who would be affected negatively, albeit to a small degree. I see no benefit to most readers and a slight detriment to a few. Station1 (talk) 08:38, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since every disambiguation page has some entry which receives more page views than some other entry, such a viewpoint would contend that each dab should count page views, appoint the entry with the highest point average as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and append the qualifier "(disambiguation)" to each and every dab page. Surely we have higher expectations of a primary topic than a stub of this nature. Some standards should be applied, at least in terms of specific page view numbers or international standing via interwiki links. Perhaps moving the main header to Bunny Abbott, as his article's main header is titled in the French and Polish Wikipedias, but is currently a redlink in the English Wikipedia, would enable the move of Harold Abbott (disambiguation) to Harold Abbott. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 09:28, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a far better solution. In fact, since there are only two articles, we could then move the artist to the base name and just add a hatnote pointing to the rugby union player. Station1 (talk) 19:51, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would join in supporting the elimination of the dab page and addition of a hatnote, but if other participants prefer that the WP:DABMENTIONs of the three fictional characters be retained, then the qualifier "(disambiguation)" should be deleted and the page should list:

Harold Abbott (1882–1971), best known as Bunny Abbott
Harold Abbott (artist) (1906–1986)

Fictional characters

Harold Abbott (Saw)
Harold "Bright" Abbott
Dr. Harold "Hal" Abbott, Jr. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 10:39, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support, clear absence of a primary topic between the athlete and the artist, with additional meanings further clouding the matter. bd2412 T 02:58, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is almost definitive in the implicit possibility that the answer is "No" when we have a guideline that asks Is there a primary topic. Kevin McE (talk) 14:56, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - absent any other argument about significance, and given the 80% page views figure mentioned by Station1, I see no compelling reason to change the status quo. The rugby player does seem to be primary over the artist and others. — Amakuru (talk) 23:37, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support, no clear primary topic. This rugby player is not particularly notable and the page views are negligible even if they are slightly higher than the other entries. —Xezbeth (talk) 05:21, 21 October 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.