Talk:Ruth Wilson

Fair use rationale for Image:Jecover.jpg

Image:Jecover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 16 September 2014

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: move the page and attach a hatnote to Ruth Wilson Epstein, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 20:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Ruth Wilson (actress) → Ruth Wilson – Relisted after ambiguity in suggested target resolved. DrKay (talk) 18:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC) Kanghuitari (talk) 05:33, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose Ruth Wilson (alleged spy) is more likely in books. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:59, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

• Not really sure how you are coming to that conclusion. If you look on google books it's actually the opposite.--Yaksar (let's chat) 23:05, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Is the proposal a move to "Ruth Wilson" or "Ruth Wilson (2014)"? If the latter, I'd say the parenthesis adds rather than resolves ambiguity. Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
• Strongly Support if this is a move to make the actress the primary topic. If this is to move the page to include 2014, I'm confused. The actress receives a ridiculously high percentage of the page views (last month it was over 1444 times as many). There is also a similar disparity in terms of incoming links. Sure, recentism is a valid concern, but when the disparity is this huge (and the spy's page views have never been particularly high -- I see numerous months with no views at all) the case is pretty clear cut. Additionally, the most common name for the spy seems to be Ruth Wilson Epstein, further cementing the actress as the primary.--Yaksar (let's chat) 03:32, 18 September 2014 (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.