Talk:Francisco de la Torre

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Andrewa in topic Requested move

Requested move edit

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: page moved. Neither the destination nor its talk page have significant content nor history; As noted below, the two-way DAB is unnecessary. Andrewa (talk) 02:53, 21 February 2011 (UTC)Reply



Francisco de la Torre (composer)Francisco de la Torre — The primary referent for the name is the composer. The page was moved without discussion to create a two-term DAB page for a fencer (born 1952), whose notability isn't even remotely near that of the composer. (Google backs me up: try it yourself.) Moreover, none of the links were fixed, leaving this article an orphan. Rather than fix those immediately, or put this move up as uncontroversial and risk a conflict, or move the DAB page and redirect the title back here and risk a conflict, I thought it best to just see where consensus lies. Also:
Francisco de la TorreFrancisco de la Torre (disambiguation)Srnec (talk) 17:38, 12 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Survey edit

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
  • Support Primary topic. No need for a disambiguation page per wp:twodabs, a hate note on each page is sufficient. walk victor falk talk 20:11, 12 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
    • You're right about the DAB page. I guess I was on autopilot. There is a user who likes to call these sorts of move "improperly formatted" if you don't mention that a DAB page needs moving. But in this case it really is no harm to just delete the DAB page and use a hatnoe. (I think only one is needed, no?) Srnec (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2011 (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.