Talk:Anthony Jennings (musician)/Archive 1

Requested move 24 December 2022[edit]

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.

Moved to Anthony Jennings (musician). BD2412 T 04:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Jennings → Anthony Jennings (harpsichordist) – not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC Joeykai (talk) 23:17, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Anthony Jennings (musician). 162 etc. (talk) 01:57, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination or per the more-intuitive proposal by 162 etc. Although there is occasional reluctance to create two-entry disambiguation pages, English Wikipedia already has thousands of such pages and, in this instance, there is no indication that the historical notability of the New Zealand musician is greater than that of Anthony Jennings (American football). Thus, I also support creation of an Anthony Jennings dab page, which can include, under "See also", Toni Jennings, American politician from Florida. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 03:04, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The American football player has a very minor career and is not well known. The coverage of the subject is entirely local and trivial (mainly routine team transfer announcements which are press releases that lack independence; stats pages; non-notable blogs, and interviews which lack independence from the subject; from what I can tell zero sources would pass WP:SIGCOV requirements). It's not clear the subject would pass WP:SPORTSBASIC. I'm strongly considering taking it to WP:AFD. The harpsichordist is more well known internationally, and has been covered in many academic reference works across time. He is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.4meter4 (talk) 04:18, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The AfD is now open, ~~with early results favouring "keep"~~. 162 etc. (talk) 16:57, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@162 etc. I would consider this a biased notification of a discussion and a violation of WP:CANVASING. I suggest you replace this with a neutral notice without commenting on any kind of outcome.4meter4 (talk) 19:07, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I entirely agree with this interpretation of WP:CANVASSING, but I've edited my comment above. 162 etc. (talk) 22:26, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@162 etc. Merely striking the comment doesn't solve the problem of canvassing. It needs to be completely redacted so the word "keep" isn't visible on the page. People can still read you non-neutral comment. Canvassing policy is very clear that notifications should be neutral without commenting on any side of an issue. My comments here should also be redacted (ie completely removed) and all that is left should be a neutral notification. 4meter4 (talk) 17:19, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that is canvassing at all, no more so than was your comment that you were thinking of starting an AfD. Both are germane to this discussion since deletion of the other article would render this RM moot, and neither was posted elsewhere to my knowledge. Station1 (talk) 07:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ Station1Um, I made that comment a half a day prior to the AFD's creation. So no it isn't Canvassing. It also wasn't a notification of the AFD as at that point I hadn't decided to create it. I only decided to do that after the notability tag I placed was reverted. The comment made by 162etc. is a non-neutral notice as its provides commentary on the discussion rather than simply notifying people about the discussion. It's canvassing. The issue here isn't the placement of a notice, which is appropriate, but the partisan language of the notice, which isn't appropriate. But considering, I have entirely withdrawn the nomination this seems like a needless comment at this point. 4meter4 (talk) 15:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per Roman Spinner and Joeykai. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:56, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Joeykai and Roman Spinner. Cbl62 (talk) 17:46, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Joeykai and Roman Spinner's reasoning and arguments. Ejgreen77 (talk) 20:08, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seems we have two Anthony Jennings of relatively minor note, neither one of which could be considerd the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:24, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I would like to hear why people do not think musician meets WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The harpsichordist has more WP:SUSTAINED coverage across time and appears in far more WP:SECONDARY sources than the athlete. This would seem to pass the "long-term significance" part of that guideline. Respectfully, the athlete has not been written about in anything other than current event type articles and press releases in routine sports coverage, and is completely absent from any sports related books, reference works, or any other kind of secondary source publication indicating long-term significance. The musician has tons of news coverage as well in New Zealand and Europe in concert reviews, recordings, etc. (some of which are accessible in the external link to his entry in the New Zealand National Library) What the musician has, that the sports figure does not, is a considerable amount of academic publications on his life and career. Are we really fairly weighing the evidence? Is this just a gut vote on popularity, or are we actually giving some serious attention to scholarship in making this decision?4meter4 (talk) 22:02, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

4meter4, serious attention to scholarship? There's likely very little on Jennings the football player in scholarly works written by academics. But there's a lot written on him in popular news sources, which also counts for notability. He was the starting quarterback at LSU, which means he played the most high-profile position for one of the most high-profile teams in one of the most high-profile sports in America. Jennings the harpsichordist is a rather obscure academic musician. This shouldn't be difficult. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:41, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn’t expect there to be anything in academic writing either, but you can’t seriously tell me that popular sports doesn’t get a lot of coverage in books. It does. There’s whole encyclopedias dedicated to college football and it’s notable historic players, in addition to a large number of other kinds of books on college football. I’m just pointing out none of those has written on this player. I’d further note that the harpsichordist has decades of concert reviews by music critics in New Zealand, UK, and Australia newspapers (particularly in the 1970, 1980s, and early 1990s) so he has just as much in not more media coverage and from a wider international sphere. Regardless, I take your point that you are arguing American college sports as a less obscure topic than the career of a non-American classical musician (who I would consider a concert performer, conductor, and church musician as his area of primary notability and not as an academic; he’s chiefly known for his public concerts and recordings). It’s a bit of an American-centric perspective for a global encyclopedia. Regardless, I am resigned to the fact that it doesn’t seem to matter the quality or breadth of the coverage or sustained aspect of the coverage. All it it seems to matter is the perception of topics and whether or not they matter to the voter. In other words the evidence doesn’t seem to matter.4meter4 (talk) 02:32, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Anthony Jennings (musician). This year's pageviews do not indicate a WP:primary topic between these two articles. "Musician" is preferable to "harpsichordist" since the subject was apparently an organist and involved with choral music, but "harpsichordist" is an acceptable second choice. Station1 (talk) 07:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Station1's views. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I have no opinion on supporting or opposing the primary topic displacement ... but if this article is moved, the new title should be Anthony Jennings (musician). The title as proposed has an overly precise disambiguator. Steel1943 (talk) 17:33, 29 December 2022 (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.