Talk:Mary C. Cain

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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: This discussion got a bit confused, but I believe there's consensus to Move to Mary Cain (athlete). The dab page will go to Mary Cain. Cúchullain ^t/c 15:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

---

Mary C. Cain → Mary Cain – A simple google search showed this Mary Cain has more nobility compared with another Mary Cain born 1904 (I already move her name to "Mary Cain (politician)". Removed middle initial because she's not widely known with that characteristic. Philipmj24 (talk) 02:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose - and I have reverted above-mentioned undiscussed move, restoring Mary Cain since this is evidently a multi-move request. There has been all sorts of funny business with this BLP including blanking the politician who is clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in Google Books. As User:Sjö indicated when reverting previously diff Mary Cain (athlete) is the usual dab for Category:American middle distance runners. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support - Philip, I think you jumped the gun on the other page move, but it is well apparent that the current running phenomenon is already surpassing the deceased, 1950's segregationist in notability. As I just updated, including Indoors, 5 National High School Records, 3 (or more) U.S. Junior records and a world youth best. For you non-trackos out there, she took over 5 seconds (that's a huge bite) out of a record that hasn't been touched in 30 years. And she is barely 17, meaning there is a lot more to be heard from this girl. In the last 4 months, I've probably exceeded 50 edits just keeping her record status updated and correcting the numerous times the (shortened, non-initialed) name that has been incorrectly posted by other editors. Its not exactly breaking news, but its a busy article. Trackinfo (talk) 04:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I just did a google search for the name. I was into the third page before I came up with any listing that was not the athlete, and it was for a Windham County Senate candidate. Three more non-athletes came up before I got to page 6 when the "politician" came up, in the form of the wikipedia article. Trackinfo (talk) 02:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

The web tends to be rather recentist. Try a book search. Dicklyon (talk) 03:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

One might counter, how many books has the runner written, or being a more recent phenomenon, how many would she likely be a part of yet? But doing the book search, the deceased Cain only shows up as #6, #11 and #15 suggesting she is not that overwhelmingly notable just under the name Mary Cain. I turned that sideways; doing a google search for "Mary Cain Mississippi", the Mary Cain from that state does not saturate the results. 7 hits and then other people by that name start showing up in droves. Recentism is an easy claim to hold status quo. It doesn't seem to hold water here. Trackinfo (talk) 06:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose, but support Mary Cain (athlete) per iio. Let's not fall into the recentism and crystal balling that Trackinfo suggests. As for the other, I wouldn't oppose Mary Cain (politician) and a dab page, but to suddenly switch primaries is almost never sensible. Dicklyon (talk) 06:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
• Comment why "(politician)" instead of Mary D. Cain ? -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 06:44, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Good point, that's where 90% of her mentions are, except that her column was "Mary Cain's Column." In ictu oculi (talk) 11:40, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

If "90% of her mentions " are Mary D. Cain, I say it should be move to the said name. There are several example of pages with the middle initials if they are known with that. Unlike the runner Mary Cain, she is not known for adding the middle initial. Philipmj24 (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

• Comment I would support Mary Cain (athlete) and Mary Cain (politician) if no consensus is met. However, keeping the article as "Mary C. Cain" wouldn't be appropriate. Besides images, you will get no results when searching the athlete on Google or anywhere else. Unlike other individuals, she is not widely with that middle initial. But I go back to my first argument that we should move to Mary Cain simply because of nobility, there's really no argument here. Philipmj24 (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

It's evident that Mary Cain (athlete) is the correct title at least for the next couple of years per WP:RECENT and WP:CRYSTALBALL until the runner starts garnering print references. As for the (ghastly but notable) "politician" judging from the refs Mary D. Cain with hatnotes in either direction and a dab at Mary Cain is the correct solution per WP:TWODABS which agrees with DickLyon above, so Mary Cain should for the next couple of years be a twodab till this settles down. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the proposed solution of having Mary Cain as a twodab and the name Mary Cain (athlete). We may not have to wait a couple of years. Cain already has international experience as an athlete (at the 2012 World Junior Championships) and trains under the renowned coach Alberto Salazar. If she qualifies for the 2013 World Championships this summer as a high school student, that will no doubt garner enough print references. But for now, I can settle with Mary Cain (athlete) if everyone else agrees. Philipmj24 (talk) 16:19, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

It needn't be a 2dab, since we have a Mary J Cain, as well as a Mary Kane -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 05:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Well I wish her well, would be nice to see a young athlete's acheivements become more notable than a not particularly attractive reminder of Mississippi's past. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support, Mary Cain, the athlete, is known almost exclusively by her first and last name in the Track and Field community. Listing her as Mary C. Cain does not make much sense. As Mary D. Cain, the politician, was known largely by her full name including her middle initial, so it would make more sense for her listing to include that.Amicusbrief (talk) 23:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support, Mary Cain, is how she is known. A compromise would be Mary Cain (Athlete) and Mary Cain (politician) , and I think that makes far more sense than the middle initials.

Yes it's how she's known, but the proposed target title is taken; this RM can't be supported as written; at minimum, at multi RM with notice at the other article would be needed; disambiguation of some kind is needed. Dicklyon (talk) 15:33, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

The location of this discussion does baffle me. Normally I would expect this discussion would go to a neutral place off the mainstream, like an AFD, with a directive from all affected articles sending the few people who are interested to that offsite location. There is no mention of this discussion on the other article (though in the history you'll see another couple of editors had blanked the article and written one about the runner in its place. And that is the kind of editing having a sensible, neutral consensus should avoid. I just put a notice in. Looking at the few edits that article has inspired, I see there has been virtually no attention to that article for years. I wrote to the originator of the article to get their input--something that should have been done at the beginning of a fair discussion. There probably should be more, like a notice on the top of both affected pages in mainspace. Trackinfo (talk) 16:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• Proposed moves, if there are no objections, I think the consensus here is to move Mary C. Cain to Mary Cain (athlete), move the current Mary Cain to Mary Cain (politician), and have Mary Cain a 2dab (or 4dad?). I don't think I can do the last action, so we will need administrative help for the last act. Philipmj24 (talk) 23:09, 21 May 2013 (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.

Confused

I don't understand the following sentence, "Historically no records set indoors at the University of Washington track have been accepted because at 307 meters, the track is oversized, although it is significantly smaller than a normal 400 meter outdoor track." If it's 307 meters, wouldn't it be undersized vice oversized? I'm not a track expert so I didn't want to change without confirmation. 108.227.31.155 (talk) 16:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Just to clarify, standard indoor tracks are 160 to 200m, so the University of Washington track is an oversized, indoor track at 307m and the times set on it are not generally recognized as indoor records. The standard outdoor tracks are 400m, so this record did constitute an overall record at the time it was set.Amicusbrief (talk) 00:12, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I wrote the core of that statement. This is the long form anomaly in T&F records. Indoor tracks are limited to just over 200 metres (220 yards is acceptable). University of Washington and many other tracks are oversized and do not qualify as legal "indoor" tracks for record purposes. That should be understandable. Mary's problem is she ran superior to the Outdoor record time on a track smaller than a standard outdoor track. The IAAF saw through this and since 2000 allows indoor records to count as world records (which also means that the Indoor world record in the Men's Pole Vault, set in 1993 does NOT count because it occurred 7 years before the IAAF made that decision). But other recordkeeping organizations have not necessarily followed suit with the IAAF rule. They see a roof over the track and say its an indoor event and the track is not legal. Their computer goes into the "not valid for record purposes" subroutine. They don't even think about the outdoor record. The high school recordkeeping governing body, the NFHS does not even consider records set in non-high school competition. So the University of Washington race was not a high school only race. This leaves the whole concept of a record set by a high school athlete outside of high school competition up to . . . Track and Field News, a magazine, to determine the standards. So will a record set on a smaller track with a roof over it count as a high school outdoor record? We have to wait until we see it published. Or until the question is mooted when she betters it on an outdoor track and/or in a high school only race. So far, it hasn't happened. Trackinfo (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)