Talk:Mons, Belgium

Untitled

R.A.E.C Mons isn´t a famous club!! and the battle of mons wasn´t the first battle fought by the british! Verduna was before, marne too!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Vermesan (talk • contribs) 00:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

The Battle of Mons took place in August 1914; the First Battle of the Marne was in September 1914, while the Battle of Verdun took place in 1916. The name first battle contributed by User:GJeffery was kept. LVan 14:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't we transwiki some of those pics

Wow. That is way too many pictures for an encyclopedia article. I suggest someone get an admin to transwiki most of them to Commons! --Coolcaesar 02:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - All of those pictures are accessible in Commons and were therefore deleted from this site LVan 17:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Completeness problem

Having proofread this entire translated page, I am shocked to see how much longer the original French page is. I believe that the translator should work at enlarging the English page to match the original. Alexneophile (talk) 01:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The English text reads like an uncorrected machine translation, and at some points is simply not even comprehensible. It really ought to be revised. Notapussycat (talk) 02:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 3 January 2024

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: Consensus to move (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 19:41, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

---

• Mons → Mons, Belgium
• Mons (disambiguation) → Mons

– (also rename Category:Mons category tree) Mixed results here. This city is the main result in a Google Books search for mons -author:mons, but Google Scholar shows almost entirely uses of mons (planetary nomenclature). A third topic by this name also appears in Scholar and gets overwhelmingly more pageviews. Overall this points to there being no primary topic. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 19:13, 3 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

• Cautious oppose I realise that this may reflect British bias, but many people will know the city because of the famous WWI battle, and the Angel of Mons. Presumably Belgian people would tend to regard it as the primary topic. The astronomical meaning seems a bit obscure, even to people with some basic knowledge of astronomy. Searches and the like aren't decisive. PatGallacher (talk) 20:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Seems to still be WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Use of planetary mons seems to be limited to specialist articles, not works of general reference. Walrasiad (talk) 20:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nomination. There are 27 entries listed upon the Mons (disambiguation) page, with little indication that the Belgian city's renown is at such a high level that it dwarfs the combined notability of the remaining 26 entries. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:43, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

The Belgian city has 100k residents. Most of the other locations have less than a 1,000 residents. Even adding them all up, it is a small fraction. Walrasiad (talk) 22:28, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

• Clickstream rendering for Mons at WikiNav for October '23 indicates a hatnote traffic of 137 over total incoming 7.3k (~2%) and total outgoing 1.1k (~12.5%), which isn't immediately impressive. All time page views comparison shows the anatomy topic and Mons.(ignor) to get a lot of interest, but it's not exactly clear how much of the former is about "pubis" (Clickstream rendering for Mons (disambiguation) does show most readers to be going there, but it's still just 71; there's larger numbers in the clickstreams for Pubis) and how relevant the latter is when nobody ever bothered to create a Mons. redirect up to now (while Msgr. did happen to get made in 2008). This is interesting from the perspective of whether such a common Latin root word should trump the specific mononymous meaning of a city. --Joy (talk) 09:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:46, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose as primary topic. None of the other entries appear to even approach the notability of the Belgian city. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom. The astronomical term greatly uses the place in Belgium and in common culture, the mons Venus does the same -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 21:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
• Support – Astronomical terminology is as relevant as the city. It's not clear to me that there is a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Svartner (talk) 23:47, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
• Support, no primary topic against this sheer number of possibilities. BD2412 T 01:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
• Support - given the large pageview lead enjoyed by mons pubis (which is really very often known as just mons) over the Belgian city, it is far from correct for the primary topic to be the city. If anything, this should be a primary redirect but certainly a dab page is fine.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
• Support. Ambiguous. Consistency for all cities named Mons. Clearly better for all readers. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:03, 21 January 2024 (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.