Talk:William Hicks (Indian Army officer)
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Kharkiv07 in topic Requested move 14 March 2017
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Requested move 14 March 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: moved (non-admin closure) Kharkiv07 (T) 01:00, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
William Hicks → William Hicks (British soldier) – Page views indicate no Primary topic. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 15:01, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support and move William Hicks (disambiguation) to the baseline. But there was also the English Civil War officer, (colonel) might be better. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:23, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. I think cursory page views suggests this one actually is the primary topic, surprisingly. --В²C ☎ 16:33, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- I assume at least some of the views on this page are mis-directed hits. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 16:40, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Considering how few arrive at articles through WP search (most arrive directly from Google or a link), that number is unlikely to be significant. Generally, this is why article placement does not affect page view counts - we could give our articles arbitrary random titles and people would find them with Google. --В²C ☎ 18:55, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Tru. I'm gunning hard for image previews in search that will help solve this. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 13:49, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
- Considering how few arrive at articles through WP search (most arrive directly from Google or a link), that number is unlikely to be significant. Generally, this is why article placement does not affect page view counts - we could give our articles arbitrary random titles and people would find them with Google. --В²C ☎ 18:55, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- I assume at least some of the views on this page are mis-directed hits. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 16:40, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support basically per nomination and In ictu oculi. Since the 17th century Sir William Hicks, 1st Baronet was also in the military, a more-specific qualifier for the 19th century subject may use a form analogous to that of his partial contemporary, William Hicks (Royal Navy Officer), with the two perhaps indicated as William Hicks (army officer) and William Hicks (navy officer), respectively. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 21:11, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support. Multiple independently notable with the same name. Ghits are interesting, but ghits are for google to use to predict most likely hits, not for Wikipedia to to try to emulate google. Small dab pages are most useful for people who have followed wrong links. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- I also just noticed there is a relatively famous Bill Hicks. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 13:49, 15 March 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.