Talk:John Grogan
(Redirected from Talk:John Grogan (journalist))
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Born2cycle in topic Requested move 8 January 2019
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
_part_2.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of John Grogan be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Requested move 8 January 2019
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Move Consensus is that the journalist is the primary topic. The two counter-arguments; that the other John Grogan's are made into "comparitive nonentities" and that page views are not reliable guides of significance did not gain support from others. (non-admin closure) В²C ☎ 21:03, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
– Author pulls in 9/10 clicks.[1] Unreal7 (talk) 22:20, 8 January 2019 (UTC)--Relisted. –Ammarpad (talk) 05:42, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. There are four men listed at the John Grogan disambiguation page and the journalist does not appear to be such an overwhelmingly towering figure as to reduce the other three men to comparative nonentities. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:40, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. 90% of pageviews is pretty overwhelming. Nobody is being "reduced" by acknowledging that one article is more sought-after by our readers. Dohn joe (talk) 16:22, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. Why should a US journalist who I've never heard of be WP:PTOPIC over a sitting British MP who I have heard of? Both articles are about the same size. This isn't USopedia. Narky Blert (talk) 14:09, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Well, not to be (s)narky, but it's not ThingsNarkyBlertHasHeardOfopedia, either. This is why we look at pageviews, to see what topics actual readers are accessing, to make it easier for future readers to get where they want to go. Here, they are clearly going for the journalist article - that's why the article is primarytopic. Dohn joe (talk) 15:54, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Page views are a notoriously unreliable guide to significance. Compare Apple and Apple Inc. Narky Blert (talk) 21:05, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- Support. British politician isn't insignificant, but with such a highly viewed DAB page like this and a topic that gets far more views than the rest, it only makes sense to whittle down a few and put the journalist at the basename. Nohomersryan (talk) 19:41, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
- Support per Nohomersyran. 89.147.70.233 (talk) 10:01, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- Reluctant support. Although I sympathise with Narky's point, and a UK member of parliament is certainly a notable position, it does seem like the journalist holds the common usage edge right now, and will have long-term significance too. — Amakuru (talk) 14:34, 29 January 2019 (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.