Talk:Miguel Vargas (politician)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Miguel Vargas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101118075245/http://www.miguel.do/ to http://www.miguel.do/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 13 January 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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 19:39, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

---

• Miguel Vargas → Miguel Vargas (politician)
• Miguel Vargas (disambiguation) → Miguel Vargas

– Dominican politician is not PRIMARY by page views or long-term significance, so DAB should be at base name. Page view stats [here]. Ortizesp (talk) 16:52, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support the baseball player has 25,510 views (though has a spike) the Chilean footballer has 861, the Portuguese footballer has 530 and the athlete has 235 compared with only 4,169 for the politician. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:18, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
• Support per WP:NOPRIMARY. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:37, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nomination; Crouch, Swale and Muboshgu. There are six men listed upon the Miguel Vargas (disambiguation) page, with no indication that the renown of the Dominican political leadership figure is so immense as to dwarf the combined notability of the remaining five men. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 01:57, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
• https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Miguel_Vargas indicates the hatnote is the most commonly clicked link in the article, there's only two other links in the list, but most of the incoming traffic doesn't translate into outgoing traffic (20 out of 201 went to hatnote, ~10%). It's plausible that the politician is the primary topic, but someone should make a coherent argument for that instead of it continuing to be implied. --Joy (talk) 09:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Do you think it was implied anywhere the politician is PRIMARY, or is it just a comment? I don't think anyone could argue the politician is the primary topic. --Quiz shows 05:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

    It was implied by the placement of the articles - the politician has been in the base title while others had disambiguation markers in their titles. --Joy (talk) 09:45, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

    Indeed, the politician has been there since 2014, the disambiguation page was only created in August 2022, while other articles existed since 2008‎, 2016, 2017, etc. Since nobody even noticed that it was harder to navigate to those articles for years (there was a hatnote), it stands to reason that the average reader didn't actually have a big expectation of full disambiguation. --Joy (talk) 09:51, 15 January 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.