Talk:Nancy

Drew

What about Nancy Drew? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12:42, 4 May 2006 (talk • contribs) 209.101.246.61

See Nancy (given name). Logan | Talk 22:51, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Default page

Not sure if I should post this here or on the Nancy page; but why is Nancy, France the default page for English Wikipedia? I expected to get the disambig page. Is a city in France so relavant (at least in the UK) that it deserves this spot? Fitfatfighter 04:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if somebody who looks up "Nancy" is more likely to be looking for Nancy, France or the Democratic Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Bwrs (talk) 04:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was moved per no clear primary topic. Based on the discussion below, it appears that there is no clear primary topic for the term Nancy. --regentspark (comment) 21:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

• Nancy (disambiguation) → Nancy
• Nancy → Nancy, Meurthe-et-Moselle

– Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC) Too many other uses for the French city to be the primary topic. The comic strip, the given name, and the slang term are all competitive, making it very difficult to say that more than half the readers are looking for the city. Powers ^T 13:32, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Agree with nom that the French city is not the clear primary topic. 14:48, 9 September 2011 (UTC) The proceeding unsigned comment was from me, Jenks24. Jenks24 (talk) 14:51, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose per Nice. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  • "Nice" in English is an adjective, and we don't usually have articles about adjectives, so it's not a analogous situation. Powers ^T 14:32, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
• I'm tending toward oppose. Is there any evidence? That there are a number of alternate uses does not necessarily indicate there is not a primary topic. Traffic statistics suggest the page is correctly placed. For August 2011, Nancy (the city) 14,918 views; Nancy (disambiguation) 685 views; Nancy (given name) 702 views; Nancy (comic strip) 2675 views. The comic strip might merit a separate mention in the hatnote, but even that seems a bit of a stretch. older ≠ wiser 10:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  • In a non-personalized Google search with wikipedia excluded, the city in France doesn't appear until the bottom of the seventh page of results. Google Books and Google Scholar show a similar lack of results that pertain to the city. It just doesn't seem like the city is one of the first things that comes to mind for the average English-speaker. Powers ^T 14:32, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
    • Yes, but that only shows limitations of Google search. Most of the top google hits are at best partial title matches and not articles one would expect to find titled as "Nancy". older ≠ wiser 14:42, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
      • True, but most of those count toward the given name disambiguation page; as well, the comic strip was on the front page of results. I think there's a definite "least surprise" argument here, at the very least. To most English-speakers, "Nancy" is a name, not a city. Powers ^T 18:43, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
        • I don't agree that individuals with the given name should count for an article about the name -- either a reader is looking for an article about an individual with the given name or they are looking for general information about the name. The traffic statistics seem to indicate that there is little "surprise" involved. Of all the readers getting to the article about the city, only a very small portion went on to the disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 20:31, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
          • Yes, but we don't know how many of them came in through links in other articles, versus how many came in via a search. Personally, I didn't even know the city existed until two days ago. Powers ^T 22:20, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
            • Personal experience is also not a very strong indicator. Based on the evidence available, I see no reason the city in France should not be treated as the primary topic. older ≠ wiser 01:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
              • I'm not sure it's possible to find the kind of evidence you're looking for, then. Powers ^T 13:04, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
                • Sure it is. The google "evidence" in this case is of little use because it includes so many unambiguous partial title matches. For subjects with fewer red herrings the google results can indicate whether a specific usage is more common than others. As it is, the only other evidence we have at hand to consider is the page traffic which seems to indicate that the pages are properly as is. older ≠ wiser 13:10, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
                  • But considering a case where the hits are not in proportion to the number of people looking under the base name (which, if I'm correct, is the case here), I'm not sure how I'd go about finding that data. Powers ^T 19:40, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
                    • I don't understand what you mean by the hits are not in proportion to the number of people looking under the base name. older ≠ wiser 20:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
                      • I mean, if 20,000 people viewed Nancy and 2,000 people viewed Nancy (comic strip), but 19,000 of the first group got there via links rather than via search, while 1,000 of the latter group did the same, that leaves 1,000 people finding each page by doing a search, which would be nearly equal numbers, which would lend support to the idea that there's no primary topic. Powers ^T 00:12, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
                        • You're right. There's no way to measure that. It's mostly speculation. older ≠ wiser 00:43, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
• Support: no clear primary article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.110.243.147 (talk) 23:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose the move as proposed (silly disambiguator), and strongly oppose if the plan is to just move the article without taking care to update all the incoming links, as has happened in cases like Main. I wouldn't object to Nancy, France, which is a way better title if disambiguation is needed (whatever MOSFRANCE may say).--Kotniski (talk) 11:45, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
  • It is not "change for change's sake", it's "change so that readers can more quickly find the article they want to read". Powers ^T 12:20, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
    • But it is admitted that we don't know what articles readers are looking for in this case. If we had solid data, it would be more convincing that this is worth doing. Also it's far from clear, to put it mildly, that readers looking for Nancy in France would know it's in Meurthe-et-Moselle - far better to use France as a disambiguator. But most of all, the incoming links need to be corrected in a case like this, before (or immediately after) the move is made - promise you'll do that (because admins who come along and perform moves like this don't necessarily feel responsible for the resulting broken links).--Kotniski (talk) 13:05, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
      • I agree that simply France would be a better disambiguator than Meurthe-et-Moselle. Regarding broken links, there are many editors who regularly disambiguate links and and the links would probably be cleared up in a few weeks at the absolute most. Jenks24 (talk) 14:51, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
        • But why? There is no evidence that this would produce any benefit whatsoever. older ≠ wiser 15:15, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
          • Only because you've discounted every possible method of finding such evidence. Powers ^T 16:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
            • That you base your rationale on unsubstantiated assumptions is not my problem. The available evidence simply does not support the need for moving. older ≠ wiser 16:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
        • That would go against our French naming conventions. Powers ^T 16:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
          • Ah, yes. I only just noticed the convention for French places is "Placename, Département". Struck part of my above comment, especially considering Nancy, France exists as a redirect anyway. Jenks24 (talk) 18:44, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
            • Surely that's a problem with way the French naming conventions are formulated (no doubt because they were written with ambiguity within France in mind), not a reason for us to make the wrong decision here. Or, if we don't have the courage to go against the written conventions occasionally, then the fact that we would be compelled to choose a manifestly unhelpful disambiguator is another reason not to move the article at all.--Kotniski (talk) 08:12, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
      • If the closing admin doesn't do it, I will find a way to get it done. This should be obvious. Powers ^T 16:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
• Support. Looks to me like Nancy Grace could be primary. It certainly isn't the French city. If the move is made, the links are updated, and traffic to the article for the French city drops dramatically, then we know we have made the right decision. Otherwise, we can move it back. Kauffner (talk) 05:01, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
  • On what do you base your certainty? (And who is Nancy Grace?)--Kotniski (talk) 08:13, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
  • What evidence is there that Nancy Grace is ambiguous with "Nancy"? Or that any of the other given name holders are? While her hubby was president, Nancy Reagan might have qualified as the primary topic for the name, but not at present. And I don't think there is any other person with the given name who is commonly known as simply "Nancy". older ≠ wiser 11:54, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

The French city is No. 8 if you Google Nancy -wikipedia. Grace hosts a "justice-themed" show on CNN concerning crime and ongoing trials. She was earlier a prosecutor in Georgia. The people who watch the show and blog about her certainly call her "Nancy": "How many more mothers of kidnapped chlldren will commit suicide before CNN ends Nancy's reign", "On the other hand, Nancy DOES LIE quite frequently," "Weldon Carr -- whose conviction by Nancy was overturned by the GA State Supreme Court in 1997 after it was established that Nancy Grace had tampered with the evidence", etc. etc etc. Her Web site encourages this: "Nancy's Important Websites". Kauffner (talk) 21:54, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

So we're using blogs now to determine article titles? Ridiculous. older ≠ wiser 22:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the city of Nancy will (hopefully) still be standing for centuries after your TV star is long forgotten. Wikipedia isn't a dictionary of "now".--Kotniski (talk) 08:08, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

As soon as the last Citroën is torched, it will be "New Algiers" or "Fatimabad" or something like that. Kauffner (talk) 09:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Please avoid anti-Arab commentary. Powers ^T 13:05, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

• Support - Deciding which definition of a word/name/term is "most notable" seems a very subjective thing in most cases. I'll simply say that when I hear someone mention the name "Nancy", the french city is not the first thing that comes to mind.... NickCT (talk) 14:44, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
• Support moving to Nancy, France or Nancy, Meurthe-et-Moselle. While the second is in the naming guide, consensus of late in discussions seems to be opposed to supporting using Département and instead going with the better recognized France. Clearly the city in France is not the primary topic by any measure. Google searches show that there are too many other uses to have a primary use here. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:21, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
• Support move of the DAB to the undisambiguated name Nancy. The French city would IMO be better at Nancy (France) or Nancy, France (where it was until earlier this year [1]) rather than Nancy, Meurthe-et-Moselle as proposed. The DAB should also be refactored to give at least equal prominence to Nancy (given name) as a dominant (but not necessarily primary) meaning of the word in English. Andrewa (talk) 15:43, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Incoming links

Now that Nancy is a disambiguation page, please don't forget to WP:FIXDABLINKS. This tool makes the job easier. From a quick glance, I'd guess that over 90% of the links are about Nancy, France. Thanks, Certes (talk) 19:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Good point. And I wouldn't be surprised if it were more like 99%. There is simply nothing else on the list with remotely the same level of notability that is ambiguous with exactly the term "Nancy". But the wisdom of consensus has spoken. older ≠ wiser 22:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

And as predicted, the wisdom of consensus has not fixed the links, despite the assurances we were given during the move discussion. We really need new instructions for cases like this, where something that was the primary topic is no longer to be so - it's irresponsible just to move the article and leave the hard work of fixing the links to unspecified others.--Kotniski (talk) 07:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm working on it. I'm not made of freetime, you know. Powers ^T 13:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Though I admit it would have been nice if the closing admin had gotten the ball rolling, as the move instructions request. Powers ^T 13:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Apologies folks. I got called away by RL issues. Will do a few as and when I get time. --regentspark (comment) 15:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 25 April 2022

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: not moved. WP:SNOW (closed by non-admin page mover) Nohomersryan (talk) 23:43, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

---

• Nancy → Nancy (disambiguation)
• Nancy, France → Nancy

– the primary topic (Nancy, France) should be moved here and a specific disambiguation page created for 'Nancy'. The other settlements named Nancy are much less significant in size, and all other usages already contain an appropriate level of precision in parenthesis (see Venus and Venus (disambiguation) as a comparable equivalent). Qpwoei2020 (talk) 09:36, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi, can you give any evidence that the article that you propose is actually primary topic? Dr. Vogel (talk) 09:47, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Lennart97 (talk) 12:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Very well, I do believe that it is worth pointing out however that few French cities have pages entitled as such on Wikipedia. When more precision is needed, the general custom is to indicate the specific department and not the country, France, after the name of the city. Qpwoei2020 (talk) 22:42, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes we could move to Nancy, Meurthe-et-Moselle but there was discussion on that in the last RM. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Qpwoei2020 and DrVogel: I've converted this into a normal RM, since there is no way these moves are uncontroversial, if only because a previous RM from 2011 found that there was no primary topic. Lennart97 (talk) 12:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know Dr. Vogel (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose According to pageviews, Nancy (comic strip) is a strong competitor for primary topic - not as strong as the French prefecture, but strong enough that there is no obvious primary topic. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:27, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose I see no evidence that the proposed article is the primary topic. Dr. Vogel (talk) 14:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose I'm not convinced that it's the primary topic. Suonii180 (talk) 14:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. It's probably the primary topic on the French Wikipedia, but not on the English Wikipedia. Rreagan007 (talk) 14:50, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:ASTONISH while the city in France may be by far primary by places the given name (though is is little more than a DICDEF) is probably what the term primarily means in English. This is not the same as Paris where in English the French capital is obviously primary or even perhaps Nice where the concept of something being "nice" doesn't really have an encyclopedic meaning. Also while the city may get the most views (9,054) the comic strip has 2,576, the film has 1,504 and the given name has 1,281[[2]]. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  Indeed, but as you point out, the city does receive the majority of page views, and even if most English speakers think of the given name first, as with all pages on Wikipedia on given names, this is specifically outlined in the brackets afterwards: "(given name)". It seems to me that both in terms of page views and as per the general custom with articles on major cities (with a population exceeding 100 000 for example), it would be normal to consider the city the primary topic. Qpwoei2020 (talk) 18:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  Only given names that require disambiguation are disambiguated, see WP:APOAT and even if they were always qualified that wouldn't necessarily make the city primary per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT for example Books (EP) isn't at Books. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:19, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per reasons listed above by User:Zxcvbnm, etc. Paintspot Infez (talk) 18:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Too much confusion between the French prefecture of Nancy and the given name Nancy, which have different etymologies and are not named after each other, therefore neither is the primary topic. JIP | Talk 22:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per all the above. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Certainly no primary topic unless you happen to be French. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:09, 28 April 2022 (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.