Talk:Familial

Requested move 25 February 2016

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: Not moved, lacking support for the primarytopic suggestion. (non-admin close) Dicklyon (talk) 05:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

---

Familial → Familial (disambiguation) – In this case, the adjective should follow the primary topic of the lemma. Family has a primary topic, so Familial should redirect to Family; the adjective use does not seem to be used nearly as much to reference the biological meaning, and the album is obscure. bd2412 T 20:29, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

• Hmmm. This is odd. We have "family" meaning societal unit, "family" meaning biological taxonomy, and "Familiar" being the album by Radiohead's drummer (not nearly as "obscure" as many many other albums on WP, btw). However - look at the actual links to Familial - there aren't many, but they're all to inherited diseases. Most articles with "familial" in them relate to such diseases, as well. So I would redirect Familial to Genetic disorder (which is where Inherited disease redirects, add a hatnote there to the album, and scrap the dab page altogether. It's unlikely that searchers for either usage of "family" would get there via "familial', and editors obviously don't link to it either.

  The alternative would be to make the album the basename, with a hatnote to Genetic disorder. People (readers and editors) generally don't use adjective forms to find/link to articles, so when there is an actual topic with an adjective form (like the album), it's likely that's where people (readers and editors) want to go. Dohn joe (talk) 17:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

  • I would suspect that people don't look up "Familial" except by following links made in articles referencing "familial" connections. If those are overwhelmingly disease-related, I can certainly support redirecting to Genetic disorder. bd2412 T 04:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
• Comment I somewhat prefer the second of Dohn Joe's two options. Make the album primary, and have a hatnote to genetic disorders. As the only concept genuinely called "Familial", I think that's probably the target most likely to be searched for if a reader types that term in. As noted, people are unlikely to be searching for any kind of family if they type "Familial", and I don't think they'd type that when searching for genetic disorders either. The question of incoming links can be easily enough dealt with in the usual fashion, through ongoing maintenance, just as we would for incoming links to a disambig page.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:24, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose. "Familial" occurs 52 times in List of genetic disorders. We have three broad contenders here: the album, "family" and "heredity" (specifically genetic disorders). It's odd we're considering for primary topic something that wasn't even on the dab page before this discussion started (genetic disorders). This dab isn't even getting ten hits a day, which isn't a strong case for the album (which averages 17). I'm still bugged that Brand New averages 100 hits/day, the band gets 850 hits/day while our silly article on "brand new" products gets 14, and still the band is not the primary topic. I think "family", the proposed destination, probably ranks third behind disorders and the album. So I'm content to leave this as is. I added heredity-related topics and {{look from}} and {{in title}} to the disambiguation page, which make it more useful. – wbm1058 (talk) 18:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

---

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.