Talk:Thomas Brett (cricketer)
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Samee in topic Requested move 27 December 2017
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move 27 December 2017
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Done. (non-admin closure) sami talk 19:26, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Not convinced that the 18th century cricketer is primary for a name shared by various others. I see no primary topic in page views, either. bd2412 T 20:05, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support as so often no primary. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:32, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support. No clear primary by usage, no reason to think this Brett has long-term significance over, say, Thomas Brett (nonjuror). Egsan Bacon (talk) 23:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support per nomination. Does not rise to the level of primary topic. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 23:19, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support per all the above. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:31, 28 December 2017 (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.