- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was no consensus --Aervanath (talk) 05:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
- STV (disambiguation) → STV — There are a number of meaning for STV therefore it should not go to a Scottish TV channel — -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- Oppose. Clear case of primary usage. Gets like 30 times as many page views as STV TV. STV is not used as an abbreviation for ST:V, which gets millions more views. 199.125.109.19 (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- Where did you get your stats from? According to stats.grok.se:
-
- -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- Were you planning on renaming Single transferable vote to STV? If not, it does not conflict. Are people typing in STV expecting to get to Single transferable vote? If they were you would have maybe 2718 hits for STV and 2400 hits for STV (disambiguation). Such is not the case. Yes I used stats.grok, December. I compared STV 3813 to STV_(TV_station), 109, as those are the ones which could be named STV. I rounded off 3813/109=34.98 to about 30. 199.125.109.124 (talk) 04:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- The reason for the STV hit rate is because it is easy to type and it is a common acronym. It is not a reflection of the popularity of the Scottish TV station. Comparing STV hits to STV_(TV_station) hits is not relevant for the reason stated earlier. The hight number of hits for Single transferable vote is a good case for making the the primary page but to "avoid surprises" STV should be the primary dab page. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- Are you saying that every random capitalized three letters gets a lot of hits just because it is easy to type? Just what are they looking for, and if they did not find it why did they not click on any of the tophat links? I believe that the only people typing STV are actually looking for the article they get, and to move it would be an avoidable "surprise". For example, let us suppose that someone types in stv when they are looking for "Single transferable vote". Why on earth would someone say oh, let me type in 24 characters instead of just clicking on the link to STV (dis)? That makes no sense. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 05:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
- Support. Because the page name is ambiguous, hit counts on STV do not necessarily reflect the relative importance of the article now at that page name. Some hits belong to the article, but some are from readers looking for something else. It appears from the number of hits on STV_(disambiguation) that in fact many readers are looking for something else. Single transferable vote gets more hits than STV, but not so many more as to be the clear primary topic. In cases like this, I think it is better to put the disambiguation page at STV. Also disambiguating links to STV would be much easier if the page were a disambiguation page. --Una Smith (talk) 17:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- The link you provided to "disambiguating links" simply talks about the problem of having links point to a disambiguation page. Currently there are many links to STV, all of which would need to be relocated if this was made into a disambiguation page. From the ratio of hits to STV to the hits to STV (dis) I would clearly say the page is named correctly. If the primary usage of STV was "Single transferable vote" that would immediately be visible from the hits to STV (dis), since STV is about something else. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 05:27, 2 February 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.
