Talk:James Braid

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: Not moved. Station1 (talk) 09:10, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

---

James Braid → James Braid (disambiguation) — -- This is, in fact, a disambiguation page and, therefore, should be named as such. Lindsay658 (talk) 02:18, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose There is no primary target. The only time the "disambiguation" qualifier is usually used is when there is one primary target and then multiple other pages either based on the original or not as notable (like A Christmas Carol is about the novel, while A Christmas Carol (disambiguation) is about all of the various adaptations of the novel). TJ Spyke 02:54, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose Why? No reasoning provided for move. 76.66.194.220 (talk) 05:17, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose disambiguation pages should only have disambiguation in their title if there's a clear primary topic, see MOS:DAB. Boleyn (talk) 09:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose. Dabs don't need to have the parentheses. — The Man in Question (in question) 20:46, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose — Dab pages are named "topic (disambiguation)" only when the ambiguous page name is occupied by an article. That article needs to be the demonstrable primary topic. --Una Smith (talk) 02:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose, because disambiguation pages are named "topic (disambiguation)" only when the ambiguous page name is occupied by an article. However, in a case like this when the disambiguation page is the primary topic, "topic (disambiguation)" should be created as a redirect to "topic". --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

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.