Talk:Kou (name)

Requested move 5 November 2020

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: There is a weak consensus for Option B: to merge the articles. I will place merge tags on the relevant pages. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 20:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

---

• Kou (name) → ?
• Kou (surname) → ?

– Overlapping disambiguators; Kou (name) covers both given names and surnames. Extended rationale below with multiple proposals involving merges/splits and moves; of those, I prefer Option A. Additional proposals welcome. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 03:18, 5 November 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BegbertBiggs (talk) 22:54, 15 November 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Megan B.... ^{It’s all coming to me} till the end of time 22:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Option A repurpose Kou (surname) to cover anyone with a surname spelled that way in English (not just the one Chinese surname spelled that way in pinyin); split the surname content from Kou (name)#People with the surname to Kou (surname); move Kou (name) to Kou (given name); point Kou (name) to Kou (a disambiguation page) as {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}

Option B don't move any articles; merge Kou (surname) to Kou (name)

Option C split the non-Japanese people from Kou (name) to Kou; move Kou (name) to Kō (name) following Hepburn romanization; don't move Kou (surname)

Option D split the non-Japanese people from Kou (name) to Kou; move Kou (name) to Kō (name); redirect Kou (Japanese name) and Kou (Japanese surname) to Kō (name); move Kou (surname) to Kou (Chinese surname); point Kou (name) and Kou (surname) to Kou as {{R from incomplete disambiguation}} 61.239.39.90 (talk) 03:18, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

!votes

• Option D while it has a long description, it makes things systematical: longer subjects have separate articles, the rest are lumped into the "remainder" pages'. Lembit Staan (talk) 03:57, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
• Option B. There are too few entries to really need separate pages here. The distinctions in origin can all be explained on one page. BD2412 T 20:07, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• Nominator comment I'd be fine with Option B as well. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 10:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
• The reason this question is tricky is because name articles serve a dual purpose: providing encyclopedic content about the name, and serving as a navigational aid. If you see a name as an encyclopedic subject, then each name should have its separate article as it's a distinct topic; therefore D, and to a lesser extent C, would be preferable. If, on the other hand, you see those articles as akin to dab pages, then B, and to a lesser extent A, would mean the pages would be better placed to help with navigation. – Uanfala (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Relist comment Since there is no consensus yet... relisting --Megan B.... ^{It’s all coming to me} till the end of time 22:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Option B 162.208.168.92 (talk) 21:05, 11 January 2021 (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.