Talk:Zimmermann
Add topicLatest comment: 11 years ago by Jenks24 in topic Requested move 2 June 2015
 | This set index article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
See discussion at: Talk:Zimmerman Jrcrin001 (talk) 06:59, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Requested move 2 June 2015
[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: no consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 11:32, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
– Zimmermann has non-surname uses, also common alt spellings Zimmerman and Zimerman. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 00:37, 9 June 2015 (UTC) Facts707 (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- Additional information based on discussion and WP precedents:
- Jones and Wong - their primary topics are not what is listed under Jones (surname) and Wong (surname), although their other uses apparently derive from the surname. Facts707 (talk) 22:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
- Roosevelt lists Franklin Roosevelt, Eleanor Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt etc. at top before listing other uses and Roosevelt (surname).
- Eisenhower goes directly to Dwight D. Eisenhower rather than Eisenhower (name) because the American president is the primary topic base on his being much more notable than anyone else with that surname or any other use.
- MOS:APO says it should be Zimmermann (name). --BDD (talk) 18:59, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- No, it does not. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:24, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- re: Zimmermann (disambiguation) → Zimmermann --wrong again. The page Zimmermann (disambiguation) is necessary for intentional wikilinking of disambig pages so that dab-hunting bots and wikipedians know not to disambiguate them. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:24, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- Huh, Staszek Lem? Maybe I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying that MOS:APO demands moving the page, just that if we do, it should be (name) as opposed to (surname). --BDD (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe MOS:APO is not clear. It speaks: "They help users to navigate between articles such as the disambiguation page Spencer, the surname article Spencer (surname), and the given name article Spencer (given name)", but I don't see Spencer (name) there. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:15, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- P.S. I looked thru MOS:APO again and see that it is way far from covering all bases. At the same time I don't see it is worth wasting time to put allll' "{surname}" articles in 100% compliance with any rule: there are tens of thousands of them, and I don't see any benefit. And picking on this single one is a teardrop in an ocean. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:42, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe MOS:APO is not clear. It speaks: "They help users to navigate between articles such as the disambiguation page Spencer, the surname article Spencer (surname), and the given name article Spencer (given name)", but I don't see Spencer (name) there. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:15, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- Huh, Staszek Lem? Maybe I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying that MOS:APO demands moving the page, just that if we do, it should be (name) as opposed to (surname). --BDD (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Clearly, Zimmermann as surname is a primary topic: items in Zimmermann (disambiguation) are derived from the surname. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:24, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- No, I don't think Zimmermann as surname is the primary topic. Zimmermann would be the primary topic only if there was a particular individual named Zimmermann who was much more notable than all other Zimmermanns. For example, see Jones and Wong - clearly the surname use is the primary use but there are other uses so Jones is not just about the surname but shows other uses. I think MOS:APO should discuss this; right now it does not. Facts707 (talk) 22:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
- I don't see why a surname cannot be more important than any particular bearer. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:45, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- No, I don't think Zimmermann as surname is the primary topic. Zimmermann would be the primary topic only if there was a particular individual named Zimmermann who was much more notable than all other Zimmermanns. For example, see Jones and Wong - clearly the surname use is the primary use but there are other uses so Jones is not just about the surname but shows other uses. I think MOS:APO should discuss this; right now it does not. Facts707 (talk) 22:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support move dab to base 76.120.162.73 (talk) 21:21, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Leave as it is. Jrcrin001 (talk) 15:31, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose. In the parlance of the USPTO, "Zimmermann" is "primarily merely a surname". That is, when hearing "Zimmermann" in a vacuum, the first thing that comes to mind is that it is a surname. bd2412 T 14:11, 19 June 2015 (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.