Talk:Lennon

The second "R from surname" criterion

Top titles for "lennon" in books at amazon.com (then filtered for books about John Lennon) reveals:

• Lennon: The Man, the Myth, the Music - The Definitive Life
• John Lennon: The Life
• John Lennon: Life is What Happens
• Imagine: A Celebration of John Lennon
• John
• Lennon
• Starting Over: The Making of John Lennon and Yoko Ono's Double Fantasy
• Lennon Legend
• Imagine - John Lennon & the Jews
• December 8, 1980: The Day John Lennon Died (Book)

The word "John" is given 70% of the time. Common sense says that "ubiquitous" should perhaps have some room for leeway, however, it also says that 70% leeway would be too much. Uniplex (talk) 11:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Here's the same thing for Lenin, by the way:

• Essential Works of Lenin: "What Is to Be Done?"
• Lenin: A Biography
• The Lenin Anthology
• Lenin: A New Biography
• Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler: The Age of Social Catastrophe (Vintage)
• Conspirator: Lenin in Exile
• Lenin's Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire
• The Unknown Lenin: From the Secret Archive (Annals of Communism Series)
• Lenin's Brother: The Origins of the October Revolution
• Lenin: A Revolutionary Life

100% per the criterion. Uniplex (talk) 12:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

You are misreading the guidelines and their intention. The question is not "what is the topic John Lennon most often referred to as" but rather "what topic does Lennon most often refer to"? If you are convinced that John Lennon is not the primary topic for "Lennon", then the next step is to request a move of Lennon (disambiguation) to the base name, not to create a malplaced disambiguation page. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I was just acting on the template documentation, which seems clear in this case. What do you suggest—that the template should just be removed? Uniplex (talk) 14:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I suggest requesting a move of the disambiguation page here if you don't think this should be an R from surname. If you think the "ubiquitous" is misused in the template documentation (which I don't see as clearly reading the way you read it), I guess another suggestion would be to reword it. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I think I'll read up a bit more and mull it over for a while before deciding which way to go. Thanks very much for your help. Uniplex (talk) 14:56, 10 October 2011 (UTC)