Talk:Frederick Lewis Maitland (Royal Navy officer, born 1730)

Requested move 15 July 2023

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: not moved. No consensus for a move after discussion. Those opposed cite a relevant paragraph of WP:NCPDAB, the same guideline cited in the proposal. The proposed title has been created as a redirect. Station1 (talk) 04:26, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

---

Frederick Lewis Maitland (Royal Navy officer, born 1730) → Frederick Lewis Maitland (died 1786) – Per WP:NCBIO - For historical figures for whom there is no dominant qualifier (at least no practical one), the descriptor may be omitted in favour of a single use of the date of birth or death. For historical figures, this will often be the date of death, when it is better known, more certain, or is more recognisable than their date of birth. The primary topic for Frederick Lewis Maitland was also a Royal Navy officer, so it's best to disambiguate by birth/death year (convention prefers the latter). estar8806 (talk) ★ 00:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. – MaterialWorks 19:14, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support changing birth date to death date. Normally I would oppose removing "royal navy officer" - dates by themselves are mystifying. But in this case the other Maitland is also a royal navy officer, so it serves no disambiguating purpose here. Walrasiad (talk) 15:50, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. The current title is the Wikipedia standard and the clear dominant qualifier. What else is he know for other than being a Royal Navy officer? The nominator is quoting the wrong section. The appropriate one is: Years of birth and death are not normally used as disambiguators, as readers are more likely to be seeking this information than to already know it. Disambiguating by vital year may be necessary when there are multiple people with the same name and same specific disambiguation qualifier. In these cases, use [[Name (qualifier, born YYYY)]] with a comma and born unabbreviated (not b.). For example, with two actors named Charles Hawtrey: Charles Hawtrey (actor, born 1858) and Charles Hawtrey (actor, born 1914). The fact the other Frederick Maitland is not disambiguated does not make the situation a different one. The nomination is going completely against Wikipedia norms by removing the occupation and changing YOB to YOD. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:58, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

  Except in the case cited there, there is WP:NOPRIMARY, so Charles Hawtrey (actor) is a dab page. But Frederick Lewis Maitland (Royal Navy officer) redirects to the primary topic. Anyone who knows that this Frederick Lewis Maitland was a Royal Navy officer and searches for that, will not end up here's so that qualifier serves no disambiguating purpose and only makes the title less WP:CONCISE.

  And the fact that the other Frederick Lewis Maitland is not disambiguated is exactly why this is different and precisely why I cited the section I did, which provides Example: George Heriot and George Heriot (died 1610). estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:24, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

  But there is a dominant qualifier. He is known only as a Royal Navy officer. The clause you cite is for the rare instances of people (usually in the distant past) who have no real dominant qualifier, as it clearly says. They are notable, but nobody is really sure why. This is not the case with Maitland. All you are doing, as Roman Spinner says, is removing clarity. Why on earth would you want to do that? Does it in any way help people using Wikipedia? No, it does not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per Necrothesp. Moving Frederick Lewis Maitland (Royal Navy officer, born 1730) to Frederick Lewis Maitland (died 1786) would not provide an enhancement in clarity. It would in fact make distinguishing between the father and his son, Frederick Lewis Maitland more opaque by deleting the specific characteristic of the father's notability. The current hatnote atop the son's entry — For the other naval officer, see Frederick Lewis Maitland (Royal Navy captain). — is sufficient, although it could be revised to state more clearly — For his father, see Frederick Lewis Maitland (Royal Navy officer, born 1730). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 15:47, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

  (Royal Navy officer) does not help distinguish between two Royal Navy officers! jlwoodwa (talk) 05:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

  No, but at least it lets people know he was a Royal Navy officer, as opposed to some random bloke who died in 1786! Why do you think we don't commonly use dates of birth or death as a lone disambiguator? -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:39, 26 July 2023 (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.