This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
On 26 June 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Oppenheimer to Oppenheimer (surname). The result of the discussion was moved. |
Is there any rule for the order of entries in these lists? I think Robert Oppenheimer may be the most famous here, but it took me some time to find him down the list. A minor irritation I know, but can it be prevented? 193.1.172.163 14:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Same thing just happened to me. Only I could only remember the name oppenheimer, not his first name so it was a bit of a struggle. This isn't the first time this has happened to me. Why are the disambiguation pages giving equal weight to all possibilities instead of drawing out the obviously popular ones. 82.46.67.130 18:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Suggestion: Oppenheimer should automatically redirect to J._Robert_Oppenheimer, which should have a link to this disambiguation page. I think he's probably more notable than anyone else on this less to justify it. 94.100.23.51 ( talk) 10:45, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Rightly or wrongly, I judged the surname to be the primary topic of Oppenheimer, and moved the other entries to Oppenheimer (disambiguation). Since a list of name-holders is not a disambiguation page, but a set index, which is a list article, then it does not need a disambiguation wikiproject tag. If you disagree with my assessment of the surname having primacy then I don't mind moving the dab page back here. — Xezbeth ( talk) 17:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. With the base name redirecting to the nuclear physicist; if JRO wasn't the primary topic a decade ago – which is questionable – he arguably is now. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre ( talk) 02:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
– I split out the disambiguation page a decade ago and judged the surname to be the primary topic. It was arguably a questionable decision then but the existence of Oppenheimer (film) makes it untenable. At the very least the dab page should be at the base term. Xezbeth ( talk) 12:23, 26 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. SilverLocust ( talk) 08:53, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Station1 Bringing the discussion here for you to gain consensus per WP: ONUS. I've stated the reasons as to why linking the film on this particular disambiguation page is unnecessary: It already links to the film here: "For other uses, see Oppenheimer (disambiguation)" [2]. Listing it again is redundant. Also, per WP:RECENTISM, this film is no different than the other listed Entertainment links: Oppenheimer (TV series), Oppenheimer (play), etc. To list this particular film at the header of this disambiguation page would be similar to listing " For J. Robert Oppenheimer at the top of the Oppenheimer (disambiguation) page. Given your reasoning, one would have to list the subject at the top of each Oppenheimer disambiguation page due to the film's recent success, too. In a year's time, the film will no longer be relevant and neither will the link. BTW, the subject's page does not even link the film at the header; nor the British mini-series, or the play. Maineartists ( talk) 14:57, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
On 26 June 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Oppenheimer to Oppenheimer (surname). The result of the discussion was moved. |
Is there any rule for the order of entries in these lists? I think Robert Oppenheimer may be the most famous here, but it took me some time to find him down the list. A minor irritation I know, but can it be prevented? 193.1.172.163 14:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Same thing just happened to me. Only I could only remember the name oppenheimer, not his first name so it was a bit of a struggle. This isn't the first time this has happened to me. Why are the disambiguation pages giving equal weight to all possibilities instead of drawing out the obviously popular ones. 82.46.67.130 18:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Suggestion: Oppenheimer should automatically redirect to J._Robert_Oppenheimer, which should have a link to this disambiguation page. I think he's probably more notable than anyone else on this less to justify it. 94.100.23.51 ( talk) 10:45, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Rightly or wrongly, I judged the surname to be the primary topic of Oppenheimer, and moved the other entries to Oppenheimer (disambiguation). Since a list of name-holders is not a disambiguation page, but a set index, which is a list article, then it does not need a disambiguation wikiproject tag. If you disagree with my assessment of the surname having primacy then I don't mind moving the dab page back here. — Xezbeth ( talk) 17:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. With the base name redirecting to the nuclear physicist; if JRO wasn't the primary topic a decade ago – which is questionable – he arguably is now. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre ( talk) 02:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
– I split out the disambiguation page a decade ago and judged the surname to be the primary topic. It was arguably a questionable decision then but the existence of Oppenheimer (film) makes it untenable. At the very least the dab page should be at the base term. Xezbeth ( talk) 12:23, 26 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. SilverLocust ( talk) 08:53, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Station1 Bringing the discussion here for you to gain consensus per WP: ONUS. I've stated the reasons as to why linking the film on this particular disambiguation page is unnecessary: It already links to the film here: "For other uses, see Oppenheimer (disambiguation)" [2]. Listing it again is redundant. Also, per WP:RECENTISM, this film is no different than the other listed Entertainment links: Oppenheimer (TV series), Oppenheimer (play), etc. To list this particular film at the header of this disambiguation page would be similar to listing " For J. Robert Oppenheimer at the top of the Oppenheimer (disambiguation) page. Given your reasoning, one would have to list the subject at the top of each Oppenheimer disambiguation page due to the film's recent success, too. In a year's time, the film will no longer be relevant and neither will the link. BTW, the subject's page does not even link the film at the header; nor the British mini-series, or the play. Maineartists ( talk) 14:57, 9 July 2023 (UTC)