Talk:Courtney Cox (disambiguation)

Primary topic?

I typed Courtney Cox for the actress and instead got the disambig? Page views suggest that she is the most obvious search of that name by an absolutely enormous margin (375k page views vs 7k). Surely WP:PRIMARYTOPIC applies? Crowsus (talk) 21:31, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 18 March 2023

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 per request. Favonian (talk) 14:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

---

Courtney Cox → Courtney Cox (disambiguation) – The current situation may be a WP:SURPRISE. This spelling should be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT towards Courteney Cox as a quite common {{R from misspelling}}. Steel1943 (talk) 15:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 16:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

• Delete dabpage, and make primary redirect. I'm proposing to merge Courtney Cox (musician), and Courtney Cox Cole has already been bold merged [1]. A hatnote would sufficiently cover this. 162 etc. (talk) 16:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. About 90% of visits to the dab page result in a clickthrough for the proposed primary topic. So what's stopping us then? Well, the fact that this represents an apparent misspelling, and misspellings should never trump correct forms when building the encyclopedia's topic structure. Also, a primary redirect would make it necessary for one very prominent article (18,700 views per day) to dedicate hatnote space for two relatively obscure people (300 combined views) [2], and such a situation is always undesirable. – Uanfala (talk) 19:19, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

  "misspellings should never trump correct forms when building the encyclopedia's topic structure" Can you cite a policy that supports this viewpoint? For example, Rachel Ray and Elliot Smith are primary redirects, despite the existence of Rachel Ray (novel) and Elliot Smith (American football). 162 etc. (talk) 21:39, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

  I'm not aware of an explicit rule in the guidelines, but this is assumed (see e.g. how a misspelt entry wouldn't belong in the body of a dab page at all, and will potentially only be included in the see also section). Yes, you provide genuine counterexamples, and one of them was even upheld in a RM. – Uanfala (talk) 22:19, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

  I'll also toss in the example of Ofenbach, where consensus at RM and RfD determined that a misspelling of Offenbach was the primary topic (rather than Ofenbach (DJs)). Also Daedelus (musician), despite being the only exact title match, is not at Daedelus, since an RM determined that the confusion with Daedalus is too great. 162 etc. (talk) 16:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

  Both Ofenbach and Daedelus target dab pages, just like Courtney Cox currently does. Station1 (talk) 18:06, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

  You're correct. While these two examples illustrate that exact spelling ≠ primary topic, they do not actually redirect to a different primary topic, so perhaps they are less relevant to the discussion than the two I named earlier. 162 etc. (talk) 19:16, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. Agree with the above comment that in an encyclopedia, misinformation should never take precedence over correct information. It helps perpetuate the error. In fact, an argument can be made that the musician should be at the plain title, with a {{distinguish}} hatnote to Courteney Cox. And if other articles are similarly badly titled, they should also be changed. Station1 (talk) 21:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nomination. This is one of those rare exceptional instances warranting the proposed move. The Courtney name page and Courtney (disambiguation) page confirm that the spelling "Courtney" is so prevalent that those searching for Courteney Cox are likely to type "Courtney Cox". Since she is the completely overwhelming search topic for either "Courteney Cox" or "Courtney Cox", it would be fully intuitive for Courtney Cox to redirect to Courteney Cox. The current hatnote at Courteney Cox — For the American musician, see Courtney Cox (musician) — should be revised to "Courtney Cox" redirects here. For other people, see Courtney Cox (disambiguation). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
• I agree with people saying that correctness isn't optional. It's a very short list and the average reader is clearly able to understand it. In fact it seems helpful to teach them that the spelling is slightly different. This is an encyclopedia, it is not a search engine. We're supposed to describe reality and promote knowledge, not give undue weight to typos and make gaps in knowledge easy to ignore. --Joy (talk) 09:18, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
• Comment. This nomination brings to mind the extended discussion regarding Frankie Howard (footballer) → Frankie Howard at Talk:Frankie Howard (footballer)#Requested move 16 October 2020, but in the end there was no consensus for the proposed move and the hatnote atop Frankie Howerd still states, "Frankie Howard" redirects here. For the English footballer, see Frankie Howard (footballer). For the American politician, see Frankie Howard (Louisiana politician). The analogous solution here would be to eliminate the Courtney Cox disambiguation page and likewise put two hatnotes atop Courteney Cox. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 15:24, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nomination. When examining outgoing pageviews from this page, we see that – as of February 2023 – 615 out of the 681 viewers (90.3% of viewers) proceeded onward to Courteney Cox. These numbers suggest that a large majority of readers arrive here seeking the article about Courteney Cox, and so it would be WP:ASTONISHing not to point them to that target. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:24, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom, the other two (which I believe should remain freestanding articles) can be addressed in a reasonably short redirect hatnote. BD2412 T 17:14, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support: Many readers are likely to use this spelling, and we know with 90% certainty which topic they're looking for. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:09, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support. I think this is a common enough misspelling to justify a redirect to the Courteney Cox page. I agree with the above support arguments. Aoba47 (talk) 19:32, 2 April 2023 (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.