Talk:Wang Fei (footballer, born 1989)

Latest comment: 8 years ago by Jenks24 in topic Requested move 1 July 2015

Requested move 1 July 2015 edit

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as proposed. If anyone wants to change it to "men's footballer" instead, go ahead – no one here actually opposed that. Jenks24 (talk) 09:23, 9 July 2015 (UTC)Reply



– Potentially better disambiguators, hard to remember people's year of birth, besides, age falsification among Chinese footballers is very common. Timmyshin (talk) 21:00, 1 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

  • I'm striking this because neither the birth year nor the nationality is conclusive in my opinion. I'd prefer birth year being used only when it's obvious (ie: outside of ~3 years, minimum). No one outside of hardcore fans are going to know which one was born in 1989 and which was born in 1990. I haven't seen a single source disambiguate them by their date of birth, so I'm going to invoke WP:IAR on this one and support. -- Tavix (talk) 02:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment I get the impression that Wang Fei may be a reasonably common name (I went to University with one). This makes me wonder whether there are any other footballers other than these two who are notable. If so, the male/female disambiguator becomes rather useless. Number 57 19:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • I thought about this as well, but I wouldn't worry about it unless there's evidence of another Wang Fei footballer that is or could become notable within the next few years. There are a couple of things we could do about it:
  1. Make this RM conditional. In the event that another Wang Fei becomes notable, the birth year shall then be used as a disambiguator.
  2. Use the baseball NC and disambiguate by position. We would then have Wang Fei (goalkeeper) and Wang Fei (midfielder). If we're worried about those positions being ambiguous, we could clarify by using Want Fei (football goalkeeper) and Wang Fei (football midfielder). -- Tavix (talk) 19:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
WikiProject Football dislikes disambiguating by position, primarily because positions are more fluid than in baseball, for example. I just made an argument elsewhere for (goalkeeper), however, since that's the main exception—and (football goalkeeper) would be unnecessary unless you were dealing with, say, a hockey goalkeeper with the same name. --BDD (talk) 18:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
I just assumed they didn't like positions because they are ambiguous. For example, "shortstop" is isn't an ambiguous position name—you'll only find that in Baseball. "Midfielder" on the other hand could refer to a few different sports. That's why I included that last bit. Personally, I'm fine with the gender disambiguation so hopefully this side conversation isn't even necessary. -- Tavix (talk) 19:00, 7 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. --BDD (talk) 18:50, 7 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Weak support Disambiguating by gender feels strange, but it certainly results in more WP:RECOGNIZABLE titles. (Would "men's footballer" and "women's footballer" make more or less sense?) I came across a pair of players like this the other day, but the female player was definitely primary compared to the male. --BDD (talk) 18:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose - not standard naming conventions, and makes assumption about gender identity. Have the gender-titles as redirects if you must. GiantSnowman 19:01, 8 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
I absolutely appreciate the sentiment, but they play men's and women's football, respectively. As far as I know, neither the CFA nor FIFA would allow them to participate in those competitions if they were not, in fact, a man and a woman. MOS:IDENTITY effectively demands cisnormativity—we must assume they're both cisgender unless they identify otherwise. --BDD (talk) 20:12, 8 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

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.