The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. Favonian ( talk) 13:34, 24 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Gary (disambiguation) → Gary — Shift malplaced page as per WP:MOSDAB where there is no primary topic SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 12:38, 17 August 2011 (UTC) reply

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.

• Oppose; looks like the city in Indiana very well might be the primary topic. Absent evidence to the contrary, I'm fine with continuing this redirect. Powers ^T 13:08, 17 August 2011 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. Agree with LtPowers that in the absence of any evidence, the Indiana city is rightly considered the primary topic. older ≠ wiser 20:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Any additional comments:

• The nominator, or any other user who supports a move, needs to provide an explanation for why there should be no primary topic for "Gary". Please do not just point to a policy or guideline. Zzyzx11 ( talk) 17:14, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

The name of the article on the city in Indiana is currently Gary, Indiana, so not properly established as primary topic anyway. The current setup is certainly anomalous. The only question is in which direction it should be rationalised. In my experience people in English-speaking Europe see "Gary" exclusively as a male given name, and aren't even aware that the city in Indiana exists. It has been interesting discovering the actual history, from Germanic given name, to surname, to Elbert Henry Gary, to the city in Indiana, to Gary Cooper and so back to the given name. Meanwhile the ships called USS Gary all go back to Thomas J. Gary. I think the chain of derivation is often a better guide than mere statistics (which are unreliable and subject to change at short notice). I hope that this adequately explains where I'm coming from. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 18:20, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

No, redirects are properly seen as a primary topic, even where the actual title is different. From WP:PRIMARYTOPIC: If a primary topic exists, the ambiguous term should be the title of, or redirect to, the article on that topic. Derivation is not generally considered to be a good indicator of primary topic. older ≠ wiser 18:40, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

I'll concede the first point, but not the second. There's nothing in WP core policies which should cause us to disregard or undervalue derivations. On the other hand it seems to me that statistics, as I said before always unreliable and often transitory, are usually a bad guide to good structure in the encyclopedia. We should aim to provide easy access for all, rather than just optimising service to the (real or supposed) majority. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 19:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC does not include derivation as one of the criteria. It sometimes plays a factor, but arguments based soley on derivation have generally tended to fare poorly in requested move discussions. older ≠ wiser 19:28, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

I'm sure you're right, factually. I note that WP:PRIMARYTOPIC requires the primary topic to outnumber all other uses of the term combined. I rather doubt that that applies in this case. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 19:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

You may be right, but since you're the one advocating a change, it's up to you to provide some evidence that the city is not the primary topic. Until then, we are free to maintain the status quo. Powers ^T 20:04, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

We are all free to do what we like, but if we are responsible WP editors we are all equally under an obligation to do what's best for the encyclopedia. If, for example, you agree that uses of Gary to mean the city in Indiana possibly do not outnumber all other uses of the term combined, you ought in honesty to act on that, irrespective of what I say. This isn't a personal contest. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 20:29, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

(after ec2x) From May-2011 including the partial month of August through the 20th, Gary, Indiana had a total of 97,764 hits. For the same period, the total for all the other pages listed on the disambiguation page (not including the see also section), was 45,481. The closest single page, which accounted for a large portion of the latter figure, was Gary: Tank Commander with a total of 31,977 for the period. So clearly, by the criteria of much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined, Gary, Indiana has a comfortable margin. However, another way of looking at the data does give some reason for pause. For that period, there were 6320 hits on the Gary redirect and 2265 hits on Gary (disambiguation), indicating that a little over 1/3 of those who use the Gary redirect opt to go on to the disambiguation page (although that might overstate the matter as some portion of those hitting the disambiguation page may have come from other sources). older ≠ wiser 20:36, 21 August 2011 (UTC) reply

I'm amused to hear about the statistics for Gary: Tank Commander, which I hadn't expected. But anyway, I think I'll leave it there. Thank you for your conversation. I'll let things take their course. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 21:38, 21 August 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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.

The result of the move request was: not moved and please assume good faith and use civility in move proposals. -- JHunterJ ( talk) 17:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Gary (disambiguation) → Gary – What a stupid redirect. It just goes to show how dumb people are, thinking 'Gary' is more known for being some minor settlement in the middle of nowhere, than being a given name. The last 90 days, the page barely reached 1300 hits in a single day [1]. Gary Lineker surpassed the 3000 mark 7 times during the same period [2], thus a more popular Gary. Of course a disambiguation page isn't gonna score many hits, they're there to guide people who are vague with their searches.

As been mentioned before, the page title is 'Gary, Indiana'. Hell, even the infobox labels it 'City of Gary, Indiana'. Try applying some common sense before opposing the move. [3] VEO ^{one five} 11:40, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Has something changed since August? — Tamfang ( talk) 00:19, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Unless a person with the given name is commonly known in reliable sources as simply "Gary", the usage is unambiguous and the page views for such persons are irrelevant. older ≠ wiser 01:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

• Comment while I think the disambiguation page should be primary, your argument for making it primary isn't very convincing. Gary IN is the hometown of the Jackson Family, so is in its own right somewhat famous. 70.24.251.71 ( talk) 04:54, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. This surprised me, but all the other uses of Gary on WP (see Gary (disambiguation) are relatively obscure, so this use is primary.

  I would also support moving this article to Gary for concision. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 09:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

• Oppose. The Indiana city got 74,000 page views in the last 90 days. It is the topic for the top two gary Google results. Result No. 3 is Gary Vaynerchuk, who got 16,000 page views. Gary Speed is No. 4, but that's a current event, as well as a partial title match. Result No. 5 is Gary Oak, a redirect to a minor Pokemen character which got 5,000 views. Kauffner ( talk) 17:53, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply
• Comment. The city of Gary shouldn't be pitted against a particular person whose first name is Gary. It should be pitted against Gary (given name). HandsomeFella ( talk) 15:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC) reply
  • By that standard, the city is even more dominant. Gary (given name) got 5215 page views in the last 90 days. Kauffner ( talk) 21:19, 9 March 2012 (UTC) reply
    • I think you know what I mean. Of all searches for "Gary", how high a percentage was for a person – any person – with the given name Gary, compared to the percentage of searches for the city of Gary, or any other locality named that way. HandsomeFella ( talk) 22:03, 9 March 2012 (UTC) reply
      • Unless the persons are commonly known as simply "Gary" (a la "Elvis"), it is extremely unlikely that anyone would search for a particular person by given name. As such, page counts for persons with the given name are irrelevant. older ≠ wiser 03:06, 10 March 2012 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived 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: move. -- tariqabjotu 06:54, 4 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Gary (disambiguation) → Gary – Let's ignore all rules for a while and apply some common sense, everyone got too caught up in petty bureaucracy last time it seemed.

When you think of the word 'Gary', what do you think of; a city that's not in the top 300 population-wise in the USA and just 7th in Indiana (2010 census) with little administrative significance, or someone with that name? Let's not forget that Gary (IN) was named after a Gary, or be it a family name. If the place in Indiana is the primary Gary, how come the Wikipedia article isn't just that, like with San Francisco et al? To be honest, I have never heard of the place before I came across this and I'm sure many people would assume the same (yeah original research is frowned upon round these parts, especially when it's speculative). Regina is a disambiguation page and its leading article is the given name (which I've never heard either, thought it was a Latin title), not the capital of Saskatchewan. In Regina's case, it's the opposite of the Gary situation; an obscure name taking some precedence over a major city but at least it is a disambiguation.

It's not the original Gary, whether it is the most-known is debatable. VEO ^{one five} 20:47, 27 August 2013 (UTC) reply

• Mild support. Apart from the nomination, there's one other point in favor-- WP:NATURAL disambiguation already exists (most people will type in Gary, Indiana without a second thought) and so the city's page need not move at all. The point in opposition that gives me pause--how many people are typing in Gary wanting an article that isn't the Indiana city (instead of just directly typing Gary, West Virginia or Gary Coleman (or whatever))? (presumably SOME are, but how many?) Red Slash 00:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support per nom. IAR -- 76.65.128.222 ( talk) 03:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC) reply
• Mild(?) support - Ignoring all rules does not apply, but I'll stick to my vote. There are WP:article titles (WP:AT) and WP:disambiguation. "Gary" is a current redirect to Gary, Indiana. While the city is still popular and has historical significance, the Korean singer (also called the entertainer) is just as popular and mildly significant. Also, "Gary" is ambiguous, and is not precise enough to be mainly known as the American city. -- George Ho ( talk) 03:42, 28 August 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support, this is a good call, Gary is highly ambiguous - such that it seems printed sources outside Indiana never refer to the city named after the industrialist as "Gary" on its own. In ictu oculi ( talk) 04:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC) reply
• Comment. Several caveats: "If the place in Indiana is the primary Gary, how come the Wikipedia article isn't just that, like with San Francisco et al?" Because of the naming conventions for US places; the question of "what topic should the title "Gary" lead to?" is distinct from the question "what title should the topic of the city in Indiana have?" The city might or might not be the primary topic for the title, but the selection of title for the topic is irrelevant to that result. "It's not the original Gary" is also irrelevant. The call for common sense is not particularly needed here, and no indication of rules that need to be ignored has been presented. Reaching a consensus one disagrees with is too often portrayed as "petty bureaucracy" or "lacking common sense"; WP:AGF. -- JHunterJ ( talk) 12:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC) reply
  • Yeah, definitely. No offense to the nominator, but there are a couple things missing from that nomination. Red Slash 02:31, 30 August 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support as Gary is too ambiguous to redirect to a single thing. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 14:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support Too many uses, particularly 7 different cities in the US named Gary having articles, and that the first thing that comes to mind is its use as a given name. WPGA2345 ( talk) 02:41, 30 August 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support. Far too common a name for this second-rank city to be the primary topic. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 15:29, 2 September 2013 (UTC) reply

• Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (see previous move discussions above for specifics and stats). I admit that even the song needed a disambiguator, though. —  AjaxSmack  01:16, 4 September 2013 (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.