Talk:Ming (disambiguation)

Untitled

Page had a second redirect to [[Ming - Swiss Surname]], a non-existent page; no evidence that this should become a dab page. Deleted. —ERcheck @ 04:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Should Menzies Campbell be here if it's just the sounding of his name that would route people here?

--erbbysam 20:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes - his name is very often shortened to "Ming" (and as he's about the only person in British politics that that can refer to, sometimes his surname is left off altogether). Timrollpickering (talk) 02:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Ming (disambiguation)

In the process of dealing with incoming links, I noticed that there is also Ming (disambiguation), which used to be a redirect (to Ming) but is now a separate disambiguation page, containing much the same links. Is it necessary to have both? I notice that someone added a merge template to the second page, but there seems to have been no discussion as to how to proceed, if at all. --Pace Hale (talk) 08:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 26 September 2014

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: consensus to move the page to Ming (disambiguation) and redirect Ming to Ming dynasty, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 07:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Ming → Ming (disambiguation) – and redirect Ming to Ming dynasty, the clear primary topic. Google books results for "Ming" are overwhelmingly about the Ming dynasty, and Qing is currently a redirect to Qing dynasty. Zanhe (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Support I was actually thinking of this proposal the other day. If it were completely up to me, I would have moved Ming dynasty to Ming altogether. I think Liao can probably also redirect to Liao dynasty. Timmyshin (talk) 05:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
• Support, the dynasty is clearly the primary topic. In fact, I have scarcely heard of the other Mings listed on this page. JIP | Talk 05:20, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
• Weak oppose Ming and, in any case, people searching for "Ming dynasty" may well type "Ming d..." and click on option. Gregkaye ✍♪ 06:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
• Support. A Web ranking is a better indication of what readers are looking for than gbook results are. I count four Web results for the dynasty, four for the Ming library, one for Ming the Merciless, and one for an Indian music site.[1] The Ming library article is just a low-readership stub at this point. Voice of reason 2 (talk) 00:18, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
• Strong support - the current situation is absurd! Red Slash 03:21, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
• Support. This is quite clearly the primary topic for the dynasty. --Cold Season (talk) 17:06, 5 October 2014 (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.