This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all
disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the
discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles
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.
Southwest (disambiguation) → Southwest – There is no primary topic for
Southwest. The direction is notable, I guess, but most people who type in "southwest" are not looking for the ordinal direction--seriously, what could possibly lead to someone typing in "southwest" if they're looking for
boxing the compass, which is where
Southwest currently redirects. I almost would make the case that
Southwest Airlines is the primary topic, as it's a very important airline and probably the most common usage of the term, but there's no way; there are too many other probable results on this page. Note that Southwest airlines has
far more pageviews than
boxing the compass. There is clearly no primary topic. --Relisted. -- tariqabjotu 03:10, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Red Slash19:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)reply
With all due respect,
Necrothesp, there is no article about the compass direction and likely never could be. Which article in particular should "southwest" get you to, if not the disambiguation page?
Red Slash02:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Comment. As I noted in the move review: "I am not convinced that the number of people looking at the
Southwest Airlines page indicates that this is the primary meaning of
Southwest, any more than the number of people looking at
Sears Tower would indicate that this was the primary meaning of
Sears". I would further note that the airline is named Southwest in order to invoke the connection with the compass direction.
bd2412T19:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Because a use is derivative of another sense of a term does not mean that other sense is primary. I challenge anyone to come up with plausible scenarios in which most readers searching for "southwest" are looking for information on the direction rather than any of several things known as southwest.
older ≠
wiser03:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Yes, it's not unusual to have to fix links that are made for ordinary words (which are often better served by a link to wiktionary than to an article). You don't mention whether there were links intended for other things besides the direction, which would suggest a disambiguation page is more appropriate.
older ≠
wiser12:59, 13 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Support. I find it a very dubious proposition that readers are more likely to want information about the direction than about an entity with the name.
older ≠
wiser02:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Obviously, this is a disamb page. Incidentally, I doubt if anyone outside the US has ever heard of Southwest Airlines - that is clearly not a primary topic.
Ghmyrtle (
talk)
06:58, 12 September 2013 (UTC)reply
I'm (belatedly) starting to understand what you're saying. The problem may be that your reasoning for the move is poorly written, especially drawing in irrelevancies like
Southwest Airlines. If I were you I'd start again with a clearer explanation of why you think this change would help readers.
Ghmyrtle (
talk)
08:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The primary topic is the compass point, by reason of overwhelming significance. But as this is a redir to section, we do need a hatnote on the section (and it's there but could be tidied a bit).
Andrewa (
talk)
15:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Comment: Isn't
red equally unrefined, unclear? See
red (disambiguation). The same question applies to many of the other support rationales above, for example this ambiguous term. We have lots of other ambiguous terms, but not all DABs are at the undisambiguated name, obviously. So what is the term ambiguous doing in this sentence? Answer: It's pure
rhetoric.
Andrewa (
talk)
15:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Well, a BIG difference is that there is actually something interesting and encyclopedic to say about the color red. The sum total of what there is to say about the direction is that it is midway between South and West.
older ≠
wiser20:01, 15 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Some of that is true, but some is opinion and bad guesswork. What is interesting? I was interested to find that southwest is one of the
principal winds, and that information is in my opinion encyclopedic whether you find it interesting or not. But what we need is to focus on real issues such as that, rather than using rhetoric to try to boost particular arguments which we personally like. That's the point I was making. I won't be closing this RM of course, but when I try to close a long RM my first pass simply skips all arguments that use emotive language. This works extremely well 90% of the time. The danger, of course, is having made a provisional judgement, it's important to then have a look at the other arguments and see whether there are valid points mixed in with the rhetoric, and tempting not to even do that, and I'm sure I'm not the only admin who feels this temptation! The story of the preacher who wrote on the margin of his sermon notes logic weak at this point, speak a bit more forcefully explains why this does mostly work.
Andrewa (
talk)
18:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)reply
So consider someone searching for "southwest" -- do you seriously think they are more likely looking for something named "Southwest" or for information pertaining to the common word? Yes, there are some interesting things associated with the direction, though these seem mostly tangential details and not indicative of a primary topic
older ≠
wiser13:44, 17 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Support I see a lot of claims that the direction is primary topic, but so far I haven't seen a shred of evidence for this claim. Have I overlooked something? --
BDD (
talk)
16:14, 18 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Those would be better examples if they were items mentioned at, say,
List of fruits or
List of concepts in Hinduism, instead of standalone articles. In title discussions, it's fair to give titles precedence (cf.
Larry the Lobster). "Long-term significance" here seems to amount to promoting a
WP:DICDEF. Very few readers typing "Southwest" into a search box will be unaware that southwest is a direction between south and west. The redirection feels condescending. --
BDD (
talk)
19:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Support. Per Bkonrad above, it is "a very dubious proposition that readers are more likely to want information about the direction than about an entity with the name."
Theoldsparkle (
talk)
18:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose Although I'm tempted to say that the primary has not been justified originally, the other three SE, NE, NW also redirect to the points of the compass so that would be the obvious default per those. Of course if there was any rival primary topic or strong reason to not use the obvious dictionary definition then it should be made. Sometimes we overlook the obvious thinking it is too obvious. The long-term significance is overwhelming. Ignoring the distraction of Southwest Airlines (global scope of en.WP) and any comments based on boxing the compass should be revisited now it's been renamed. Saying that, up, down, left are DABs, right is a redirect primary. Sets are not a valid argument in themselves (as nameclashes should break them) but they do add to precedent and consistency in WP. Widefox;
talk19:53, 3 October 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.
This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all
disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the
discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles
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.
Southwest (disambiguation) → Southwest – There is no primary topic for
Southwest. The direction is notable, I guess, but most people who type in "southwest" are not looking for the ordinal direction--seriously, what could possibly lead to someone typing in "southwest" if they're looking for
boxing the compass, which is where
Southwest currently redirects. I almost would make the case that
Southwest Airlines is the primary topic, as it's a very important airline and probably the most common usage of the term, but there's no way; there are too many other probable results on this page. Note that Southwest airlines has
far more pageviews than
boxing the compass. There is clearly no primary topic. --Relisted. -- tariqabjotu 03:10, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Red Slash19:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)reply
With all due respect,
Necrothesp, there is no article about the compass direction and likely never could be. Which article in particular should "southwest" get you to, if not the disambiguation page?
Red Slash02:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Comment. As I noted in the move review: "I am not convinced that the number of people looking at the
Southwest Airlines page indicates that this is the primary meaning of
Southwest, any more than the number of people looking at
Sears Tower would indicate that this was the primary meaning of
Sears". I would further note that the airline is named Southwest in order to invoke the connection with the compass direction.
bd2412T19:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Because a use is derivative of another sense of a term does not mean that other sense is primary. I challenge anyone to come up with plausible scenarios in which most readers searching for "southwest" are looking for information on the direction rather than any of several things known as southwest.
older ≠
wiser03:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Yes, it's not unusual to have to fix links that are made for ordinary words (which are often better served by a link to wiktionary than to an article). You don't mention whether there were links intended for other things besides the direction, which would suggest a disambiguation page is more appropriate.
older ≠
wiser12:59, 13 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Support. I find it a very dubious proposition that readers are more likely to want information about the direction than about an entity with the name.
older ≠
wiser02:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Obviously, this is a disamb page. Incidentally, I doubt if anyone outside the US has ever heard of Southwest Airlines - that is clearly not a primary topic.
Ghmyrtle (
talk)
06:58, 12 September 2013 (UTC)reply
I'm (belatedly) starting to understand what you're saying. The problem may be that your reasoning for the move is poorly written, especially drawing in irrelevancies like
Southwest Airlines. If I were you I'd start again with a clearer explanation of why you think this change would help readers.
Ghmyrtle (
talk)
08:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The primary topic is the compass point, by reason of overwhelming significance. But as this is a redir to section, we do need a hatnote on the section (and it's there but could be tidied a bit).
Andrewa (
talk)
15:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Comment: Isn't
red equally unrefined, unclear? See
red (disambiguation). The same question applies to many of the other support rationales above, for example this ambiguous term. We have lots of other ambiguous terms, but not all DABs are at the undisambiguated name, obviously. So what is the term ambiguous doing in this sentence? Answer: It's pure
rhetoric.
Andrewa (
talk)
15:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Well, a BIG difference is that there is actually something interesting and encyclopedic to say about the color red. The sum total of what there is to say about the direction is that it is midway between South and West.
older ≠
wiser20:01, 15 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Some of that is true, but some is opinion and bad guesswork. What is interesting? I was interested to find that southwest is one of the
principal winds, and that information is in my opinion encyclopedic whether you find it interesting or not. But what we need is to focus on real issues such as that, rather than using rhetoric to try to boost particular arguments which we personally like. That's the point I was making. I won't be closing this RM of course, but when I try to close a long RM my first pass simply skips all arguments that use emotive language. This works extremely well 90% of the time. The danger, of course, is having made a provisional judgement, it's important to then have a look at the other arguments and see whether there are valid points mixed in with the rhetoric, and tempting not to even do that, and I'm sure I'm not the only admin who feels this temptation! The story of the preacher who wrote on the margin of his sermon notes logic weak at this point, speak a bit more forcefully explains why this does mostly work.
Andrewa (
talk)
18:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)reply
So consider someone searching for "southwest" -- do you seriously think they are more likely looking for something named "Southwest" or for information pertaining to the common word? Yes, there are some interesting things associated with the direction, though these seem mostly tangential details and not indicative of a primary topic
older ≠
wiser13:44, 17 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Support I see a lot of claims that the direction is primary topic, but so far I haven't seen a shred of evidence for this claim. Have I overlooked something? --
BDD (
talk)
16:14, 18 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Those would be better examples if they were items mentioned at, say,
List of fruits or
List of concepts in Hinduism, instead of standalone articles. In title discussions, it's fair to give titles precedence (cf.
Larry the Lobster). "Long-term significance" here seems to amount to promoting a
WP:DICDEF. Very few readers typing "Southwest" into a search box will be unaware that southwest is a direction between south and west. The redirection feels condescending. --
BDD (
talk)
19:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Support. Per Bkonrad above, it is "a very dubious proposition that readers are more likely to want information about the direction than about an entity with the name."
Theoldsparkle (
talk)
18:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose Although I'm tempted to say that the primary has not been justified originally, the other three SE, NE, NW also redirect to the points of the compass so that would be the obvious default per those. Of course if there was any rival primary topic or strong reason to not use the obvious dictionary definition then it should be made. Sometimes we overlook the obvious thinking it is too obvious. The long-term significance is overwhelming. Ignoring the distraction of Southwest Airlines (global scope of en.WP) and any comments based on boxing the compass should be revisited now it's been renamed. Saying that, up, down, left are DABs, right is a redirect primary. Sets are not a valid argument in themselves (as nameclashes should break them) but they do add to precedent and consistency in WP. Widefox;
talk19:53, 3 October 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.