Talk:Rowan Taylor (footballer)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Rowan Taylor (footballer) → Rowan Taylor –

• Only one article by this name exists, no need for disambiguating. GiantSnowman 11:00, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
• Note: Just by a quick Google, Rowan Taylor the composer appears notable because he's the Most Prolific Composer [1]. So it may be worthwhile to give the LDS and Music WikiProjects notice of this. ~Alison C. (aka Crazytales) 12:27, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
• Fair enough, WP:WPMU notified. GiantSnowman 13:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 12:27, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
• Note: Discussion moved by Anthony Appleyard (talk · contribs) from WP:RM. GiantSnowman 12:29, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
• My understanding is that because there's already a link from one page to a "Rowan Taylor" which is not this one, it's appropriate to add a disambig. The existing link now points towards a nonexistent page, which can be filled in by whoever's up for it. So we either need to keep this disambig page (my view) or we put it back to the original one and remove the link from the page that's talking about the composer (which I don't think is right). If a footballer's important enough for inclusion then I believe a composer is as well. --Matt Westwood 13:00, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• Did you consider the possibility that some pages can link to non-notable articles? GiantSnowman 13:43, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Well no, how would that work? What's a "non-notable article"? An article is an article. If a subject is not "noteworthy" enough (according to whatever consensus) it doesn't become an article in the first place. --Matt Westwood 14:51, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

As in the subject of the article is non-notable. I could add a link in a relevant article to my real name - are you then saying that because another page links to it, that article is inherently notable? GiantSnowman 16:45, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh I understand where you're coming from. Sorry, I was understanding an "article" to mean a "page on wikipedia", you were using it to mean a "link to a page on wikipedia which may or may not exist". Wah-deh-vuuuh. --Matt Westwood 19:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support, deal with the composer when they get a Wikipedia article. –CWenger (^ • @) 18:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose, leave the disambig in place for when the composer gets his page.He's notable enough. The fact there's a link to it may encourage someone to write that page. Also request that we consider the fact that we're discussing the notability of a composer on a football page may skew the poll towards "support" rather than "oppose" because frequenters of this page may be biased more in favour of a footballer. Just saying. --Matt Westwood 19:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes, that's one of the flaws in the RM process, but the intention behind listing all requested moves at WP:RM is to attract the attention of users who are considered neutral on the issue (i.e. have no particular passion for footballers or composers). Jenks24 (talk) 00:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support. We don't disambiguate for articles that might be created some time in the future. When (and if) the article on the composer is created, we can revisit this discussion. Jenks24 (talk) 00:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose per Matt Westwood. --Kleinzach 04:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.