Talk:Keith Richard
| 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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move 26 October 2018
- The following is a closed 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: not moved. Favonian (talk) 08:42, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Rolling Stones member Keith Richards
, because the top search results for "Keith Richard" are about the Stones. Furthermore, "Keith Richard" "Rolling Stone" has over 100k results to around 24k for "Keith Richard" basketball.
This seems to be a case where a misnomer is the
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Keith Richard" as opposed to someone with the actual name. Thus, I propose redirecting Keith Richard to Keith Richards. Arbor to SJ (talk) 23:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
]
- Oppose – Speaking as one who frequently has last name confusion based on the "s", I'd say no, this is just a different name. Dicklyon (talk) 04:30, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose. The logarithmic page views don't convince me people are arriving on Keith Richard in search of Keith Richards. A hatnote is good enough in this case. Nohomersryan (talk) 05:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose The hatnote is enough. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:18, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose The names are different. The musician shouldn’t lay claim to a misspelling when there is an actual person by that name. The hatnote works. Rikster2 (talk) 15:53, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose since they are different names and the guitarist doesnt have a monopoly on all possible variations of his name. ~EDDY (talk/contribs)~ 00:11, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Requested move 22 April 2022
- The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Not moved. (Calidum 14:12, 30 April 2022 (UTC)]
Keith Richard (basketball), with the rationale that Keith Richards is the primary topic. However, since that clearly failed a somewhat recent RM (as can be seen above), it isn't uncontroversial so I reverted it and started this one. Any new thoughts on this? Has consensus changed since the last move? I'm officially neutral this time. Nohomersryan (talk) 23:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
]
- Would be interesting to see what % of readers arriving at this page go on to Keith Richards. Clickstream doesn't have data yet, which makes sense as the page was only moved back to the basename yesterday. Colin M (talk) 04:15, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. No need for a new RM. The previous one was crystal clear. These are two different people with two different names. In any case, only about 3 people per day (out of 3,833) were using "Keith Richard" while it was a redirect. During the same period, 9 people per day viewed "Keith Richard (basketball)". There's no reason a hatnote isn't sufficient for those three people, even assuming they didn't actually want the basketball player. Station1 (talk) 04:47, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- For the record, I restarted this nomination because the Richards page now prominently mentions his former identity as "Keith Richard", which I don't recall the being the case last time. It didn't exactly sway me, but it might others. Nohomersryan (talk) 07:23, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Station1 and per the five unanimously "oppose" votes in the 2018 nomination above. The ]
- Oppose move per all above. These are two different people with two different names. The hatnotes work just fine to differentiate between the two of them. Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:05, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Support all Google results are for the musician though I guess Google is more likely to show different names than what people would expect in an encyclopedia if they use the wrong name. It does seem reasonable and helpful to disambiguate here especially since the article says the musican was known earlier in the singular, see this source. Create a DAB at the singular base name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- @WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:03, 24 April 2022 (UTC)]
- @
- I'm leaning support, but again would be very interested to see the clickstream data once it's available. I also want to note that the primary argument against the move, "two different people with two different names", doesn't necessarily accord with precedent. See Rachel Ray for example, which is a primary redirect to the celebrity chef Rachael Ray, even though it's only a misspelling of her name, vs. the exact name of a novel by Anthony Trollope. Colin M (talk) 16:45, 25 April 2022 (UTC)]
- Oppose These are two separate names, and unlike the mentioned example with Rachael Ray, the redirect is housed at a common secondary spelling of her first name. The hatnote is perfectly sufficient. -fuzzy510 (talk) 04:23, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.