Talk:John Clapham (economic historian)
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Martinevans123 in topic Name move
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Name move edit
I have moved this article name from "John Clapham" to "John Clapham (economic historian)" since John Clapham (historian and poet) seems more notable. The latter could be moved to "John Clapham" and/or a DAB page could be created for (at least) these two. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:01, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- I see no reason to believe John Clapham (1566–1619) is more notable: for instance, he was only a clerk in a ministry, while this John Clapham was vice head of one of the most important cultural institutions of Europe. Nemo 21:31, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- It's difficult to directly compare the value of the output of poets and economists. Certainly John Clapham (1566–1619) was not a professor and was never knighted. But he does have precedence by some 300 years. I'm not sure what you mean by "vice head". If you wish to undo the move, I would not object. But it might be better to first agree how these two individuals could be more easily disambiguated. Perhaps a DAB page is all that is required. If Sir John really is more notable, I'd suggest his article needs quite a lot more work when compared with that of John Clapham (historian and poet). Martinevans123 (talk) 21:47, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not aware of birth date or article length being criteria for disambiguation purposes, but sure it's nice if someone can improve articles. As for "vice head", it's just my translation to modern terminology of "Vice-Provost"; do you have better suggestions on how to compare the respective public offices? Nemo 15:23, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
- I wasn't suggesting that they should be. Only that they might give some indication of relative notability. If we had a disambiguation page then perhaps this John should become "the John Clapham" again. But the views of other editors on that would be useful, I think. I'm quite happy calling a Vice-Provost a Vice-Provost, or at least a Pro-vice-chancellor. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:14, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not aware of birth date or article length being criteria for disambiguation purposes, but sure it's nice if someone can improve articles. As for "vice head", it's just my translation to modern terminology of "Vice-Provost"; do you have better suggestions on how to compare the respective public offices? Nemo 15:23, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
- It's difficult to directly compare the value of the output of poets and economists. Certainly John Clapham (1566–1619) was not a professor and was never knighted. But he does have precedence by some 300 years. I'm not sure what you mean by "vice head". If you wish to undo the move, I would not object. But it might be better to first agree how these two individuals could be more easily disambiguated. Perhaps a DAB page is all that is required. If Sir John really is more notable, I'd suggest his article needs quite a lot more work when compared with that of John Clapham (historian and poet). Martinevans123 (talk) 21:47, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Image edit
The image appears to be of something completely different. I have left a query with the uploader. Martinevans123 (talk)
- The uploader has now updated the image. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:59, 20 October 2015 (UTC)