This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result of the move request was: Not moved ( non-admin closure) Fuortu ( talk) 10:25, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Jennifer Turner → Jennifer Turner (cricketer) – Was in that namespace before - moved with reason "no other article with this title". There are 2 musicians (one american (currently in draft, already available on several other musician pages (collaborations)) one new zealand), an author and several scientist - all more common names in search engine searches. common namespace pages like Jennifer Turner should be reserved for disambugation page — TGSTINT ( talk) 09:27, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. Harrias talk 08:30, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Jennifer Turner →
Jennifer Turner (cricketer) – Second request for moving: Now that all of opposing arguments from the last request are no longer valid - as a Jennifer Turner (musician) page is 1. available 2.much more frequently visited than Jennifer Turner page (nearly 10 times as much after onyl a few months) 3.has gone up in google to first rank when searching that name. Contrary to the comment by In ictu oculi (which was nonsense anyway as In ictu oculi refers to a draft by a different author... the draft became an article.. Also the article even got more than myself as contributor already. I think that a lot of those landing on the current Jennifer Turner page actually are searching for the musician - not the cricketeer - so a move of that page to Jennifer Turner (cricketer) seems more than valid to me - even it is a "one-liner" - as due to the current status probably a lot of people land on the cricketeer page and then went on to the musicians. The article should not have been moved from (cricketeer) to name-only in the first place.... The currents page should either be the most searched and popular - which is the musician - or namespace pages like Jennifer Turner should be reserved for disambugation
TGSTINT (
talk) 13:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. —usernamekiran
(talk)
19:36, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
@In ictu oculi WP:COI - seriously? I would be glad to hear any argument you see for that accusation. Or are you one of those people why WikiProject Editor Retention was created? See - I can accuse too - easily done... Notability? Seriously.. a) Notability has nothing to do with moving existing pages b) Check the provided sources - guess you surely went to libraries and checked the books and magazines used so you can tell about notability... c)If i compare to the articles you are working on... Any WP:COI there? - or why did articles which are stubs and oneliners ever get approved in terms of notability? So before you call other people names... But hey - isn't that all kind of off-topic and childish to piss on each others leg with no reason? Besides the fact that i never wrote you opposed - the word i used was "comment"... can we stay on topic? Lets just agree that all of us would like to improve wikipedia. So: It is a fact that Jennifer Turner (musician) has nearly 10 times more hits than Jennifer Turner after only a few months. It is a fact that search engine rank did raise by a ton. Also the reason to move Jennifer Turner (cricketer) to Jennifer Turner in the first place was "no other article with this title" - a reason that no longer is valid.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result of the move request was: Not moved ( non-admin closure) Fuortu ( talk) 10:25, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Jennifer Turner → Jennifer Turner (cricketer) – Was in that namespace before - moved with reason "no other article with this title". There are 2 musicians (one american (currently in draft, already available on several other musician pages (collaborations)) one new zealand), an author and several scientist - all more common names in search engine searches. common namespace pages like Jennifer Turner should be reserved for disambugation page — TGSTINT ( talk) 09:27, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. Harrias talk 08:30, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Jennifer Turner →
Jennifer Turner (cricketer) – Second request for moving: Now that all of opposing arguments from the last request are no longer valid - as a Jennifer Turner (musician) page is 1. available 2.much more frequently visited than Jennifer Turner page (nearly 10 times as much after onyl a few months) 3.has gone up in google to first rank when searching that name. Contrary to the comment by In ictu oculi (which was nonsense anyway as In ictu oculi refers to a draft by a different author... the draft became an article.. Also the article even got more than myself as contributor already. I think that a lot of those landing on the current Jennifer Turner page actually are searching for the musician - not the cricketeer - so a move of that page to Jennifer Turner (cricketer) seems more than valid to me - even it is a "one-liner" - as due to the current status probably a lot of people land on the cricketeer page and then went on to the musicians. The article should not have been moved from (cricketeer) to name-only in the first place.... The currents page should either be the most searched and popular - which is the musician - or namespace pages like Jennifer Turner should be reserved for disambugation
TGSTINT (
talk) 13:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. —usernamekiran
(talk)
19:36, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
@In ictu oculi WP:COI - seriously? I would be glad to hear any argument you see for that accusation. Or are you one of those people why WikiProject Editor Retention was created? See - I can accuse too - easily done... Notability? Seriously.. a) Notability has nothing to do with moving existing pages b) Check the provided sources - guess you surely went to libraries and checked the books and magazines used so you can tell about notability... c)If i compare to the articles you are working on... Any WP:COI there? - or why did articles which are stubs and oneliners ever get approved in terms of notability? So before you call other people names... But hey - isn't that all kind of off-topic and childish to piss on each others leg with no reason? Besides the fact that i never wrote you opposed - the word i used was "comment"... can we stay on topic? Lets just agree that all of us would like to improve wikipedia. So: It is a fact that Jennifer Turner (musician) has nearly 10 times more hits than Jennifer Turner after only a few months. It is a fact that search engine rank did raise by a ton. Also the reason to move Jennifer Turner (cricketer) to Jennifer Turner in the first place was "no other article with this title" - a reason that no longer is valid.