Talk:Stephen Smith (cricketer)

Requested move 18 July 2019

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: No consensus for RMs 2 or 5 (normally would be relisted, but given the scope of this mass RM it would probably be easier to deal with those again separately), consensus for 8 with Station1's modification of not having a period, and consensus in favor of the remaining proposals (1, 3, 4, 6, 7) as proposed. Thanks, (closed by non-admin page mover) DannyS712 (talk) 18:03, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

---

1. Stephen Smith (cricketer, born 1822) → Stephen Smith (cricketer)
2. Steve Smith (academic) → Steve Smith (international relations theorist)
3. Steve Smith (politician) → Steve Smith (Minnesota politician)
4. Stephen Smith (footballer, born 1986) → Stephen Smith (footballer)
5. Steve Smith (Scottish footballer) → Steve Smith (footballer, born 1899)
6. Stephen Smith (educationalist) → Stephen Smith (headmaster)
7. Stephen J. Smith (Wisconsin politician) → Stephen J. Smith (politician)
8. Stephen J Smith → Stephen J. Smith (physiologist)

– These nominations are closely related to the currently active RM at Talk:Steve Smith (cricketer)#Requested move 14 July 2019. Some may be uncontroversial technical moves — others may require a discussion, but by combining these eight titles into a single RM, rather than numerous individual nominations, analogous considerations may be determined. At the start, 1) Stephen Smith (cricketer, born 1822) is the sole cricketer named "Stephen", therefore the birth year is superfluous. The same with 2) Stephen Smith (footballer, born 1986) — no need for the year. Since other footballers named "Steve Smith" are disambiguated by birth year, 3) Steve Smith (Scottish footballer) should be at Steve Smith (footballer, born 1899). Taking into account the number of academics and educationalists disambiguated by their specialties under Steven Smith#Academics, 4) Steve Smith (academic) would need to be disambiguated as Steve Smith (international relations theorist) or, perhaps, something more succinct [unnecessary, since he is the sole academic named "Steve Smith"], while 5) Stephen Smith (educationalist) may need to be Stephen Smith (headmaster). Because we have, under Steven Smith#Politics, Steve Smith (Arizona politician), 6) Steve Smith (politician) would need to become Steve Smith (Minnesota politician). Finally, 7) Stephen J. Smith (Wisconsin politician) is the sole "Stephen J." in politics, therefore he can be Stephen J. Smith (politician) or, simply, Stephen J. Smith if 8) Stephen J Smith is rendered without the dot. However, if we decide to include the dot, then the Wisconsin politician needs the qualifier "(politician)" and the man with the newly-appended dot needs to be indicated as Stephen J. Smith (physiologist). — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:58, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

• Support 3rd & 8th (the ones that further disambiguate it), Don't care either way on 2nd, 6th (or 5th) (the parentheses-changing ones), idk about 1st, 4th, 7th (which get rid of some of the qualifiers - I'd have to look into those). Paintspot Infez (talk) 01:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
• Support 1st – apparently the only "Stephen" that was a cricketer. —BarrelProof (talk) 08:46, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose moving Steve Smith (Scottish footballer) to Steve Smith (footballer, born 1899): according to WP:NCPDAB using a more specific qualifier is preferable to using an imprecise qualifier + DOB. Opera hat (talk) 10:15, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

As noted in the nomination at 3), the form Steve Smith (footballer, born 1899) is analogous to three others — Steve Smith (footballer, born 1874), Steve Smith (footballer, born 1946) and Steve Smith (footballer, born 1957). Those three are not indicated under the longer forms Steve Smith (English footballer, born 1874), Steve Smith (English footballer, born 1946) and Steve Smith (English footballer, born 1957) since all three are English. If we were to use the longer forms for those three, we would need to identify the Scottish footballer as Steve Smith (Scottish footballer, born 1899). Since the three English Steve Smiths are identified by birth years, rather than by nationality, the identification of the remaining footballer Steve Smith as Scottish, lacks a counterbalancing analogy in that no other footballer named "Steve Smith" is being identified by nationality. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 18:34, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Nationality is a more desirable option than date of birth – people searching for the article are more likely to know the subject's nationality than when the subject was born. As you say, there are three Steve Smiths who are English footballers, so "English" is useless as a disambiguator in those cases: hence the need to use date of birth instead. But if there is only one Scottish footballer called Steve Smith, then there is simply no need to change from a recognisable qualifier (nationality) to an obscure one (date of birth). Opera hat (talk) 21:36, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Those who bear the exact same name and are identified by the exact same profession should be disambiguated in analogous fashion so as not to confuse users. A compromise solution may be to identify each of the four Steve Smiths by their playing position — Steve Smith (outside left), Steve Smith (midfielder), Steve Smith (English goalkeeper) and Steve Smith (Scottish goalkeeper). Such disambiguations, however, may run counter to the guidelines at WP:WikiProject Football where this discussion should probably post a notification. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:30, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: Announcement of this discussion appears at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 01:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree completely with Opera hat's analysis on this point. However, your alternative of dab by position would also work in this case as an one of those "occasional exceptions" to the guidelines. At least they should be redirects. Station1 (talk) 04:39, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

"Those who bear the exact same name and are identified by the exact same profession should be disambiguated in analogous fashion so as not to confuse users." In what way is it confusing? Also: whatever internal guidelines WikiProject Football have come up with do not overrule WP:Article titles policy and WP:Naming conventions (people) guidelines. Opera hat (talk) 11:13, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

• Support 1st, 3rd, 4th and 7th per WP:OVERPRECISION and WP:CONCISE. Neutral on 6th since I don't see a difference. Oppose 2nd and 5th per WP:OVERPRECISION and WP:CONCISE. Support 8th but preferably without the period/full stop after the "J" since it's apparently not an initial and that's how Stanford writes it (however, since some sources do use the period, Stephen J. Smith should be a dab page). Station1 (talk) 04:39, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
• Support 1, 4 and 7 as unnecessary disambiguation; support 3 as insufficient disambiguation. Opera hat (talk) 11:13, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
• Support 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, and 8th with Station1's proviso on the latter for the period after the J. Nick Number (talk) 15:45, 22 July 2019 (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.