Talk:Fife (disambiguation)

'Fife' - Instrument vs Location?

When searching Wiki for "fife", the default page it takes you to is the page for the 'council area in Scotland'. Why is this? Other instruments that share a name with a location take you to the instrument, not the location, and this seems to be the rule of thumb... why doesn't 'fife' go to the instrument page? Can this be changed? (Other instruments that are also locations: drum, trumpet, marimba, etc...) Walterblue222 (talk) 21:25, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

The above question has also been posted and responded to at Talk:Fife#'Fife'_-_Instrument_vs_Location?. Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:52, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 1 February 2019

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 section.

The result of the move request was: do not move. (closed by non-admin page mover) Warm Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 18:29, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

---

• Fife (disambiguation) → Fife
• Fife → Fife, Scotland

– Fife and Drum Corps have been a staple in American history since the Revolutionary War, and were used as military musick most notably in the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. They were important both in camp and during battle, as they would signal commands to the troops, provide the beat at different tempos while on the move (march, quickstep, short troop, etc.) and announce schedules for daily routines (meal calls, taptoe, make/break camp, etc.). Fife & Drum Corps are extremely popular in New England, and throughout the United States of America especially for living history events, reenactments, musters, parades, ceremonies and concerts. Fife & Drum bands are also used in some other countries, particularly Switzerland (especially Basel). There is still a Fife and Drum Corps in the United States Army 3rd Infantry regiment, known as the Old Guard Fife and Drum Corps, who are the official escort to the President of the United States of America. Performing at armed forces arrival ceremonies for visiting dignitaries and heads of state at the White House, they also participate in every Presidential inaugural parade, and serve as goodwill ambassadors throughout Europe, Australia and Canada; notable sporting events the Corps has performed at include NCAA bowl games, NBA games, NFL games, the Kentucky Derby, the Indianapolis 500, and the Olympics.

the term "fife" universally refers to the instrument the instrument "fife" has no other name the instrument "fife" has a longer history the instrument "fife" has long-term significance, greater enduring notability and educational value the location "Fife" has also been known as 'Fib', 'Fif' and 'Fifeshire' despite residents disliking the title "Fifeshire", this title has been used in the past there are maps referring to the location's title being "Fifeshire" there are organizations named after the location, such as the "Fifeshire Artillery Militia" that was "based in and named after Fifeshire in Scotland", and the "Fifeshire Heavy Battery" which "was a volunteer unit first recruited in Fifeshire, Scotland in 1860". There are many locations that have one title in the native language of the people inhabiting and a different title when other people refer to it in the English language. Japan is the English title for the East Asian country, but its inhabitants refer to it as Nippon or Nihon, not Japan. It is this principle that suggests that, outside from it's inhabitants, the proper title used for the council area in Scotland is "Fifeshire". 'Fib' and 'Fif' don't have Wiki pages, the location page could be moved to either of these. "Fifeshire" redirects to the location page the location is titled "Fife" in Scottish-English, while the instrument is universally named "fife" in all English.

Due to the multitude of relevant reasons listed above, the primary page for the word 'fife' should be the disambiguation page, while the page regarding the location should be moved to 'Fife, Scotland' (or 'Fife (location)', 'Fib', 'Fif', or 'Fifeshire') The only indisputable arguments for not doing this are that 1) the Wiki page for the location was created 18 months before the instrument, and 2) there are more advertisements and clicks from Google referring to the location instead of the instrument. Walterblue222 (talk) 03:05, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

• Support per nom - given that the instrument exists, there's no full primary topic for the name "Fife". Paintspot Infez (talk) 03:47, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
• Some stats were provided here indicating that the place may be primary and there is a hatnote to the instrument but unlike St Kilda and Rothesay their names do appear to be unrelated. As noted "Fife" is the formal and common name outside Scotland, unlike the Isle of Lewis, Isle of Skye and Isle of Mull which seem to be common named in (England) English. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:26, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - just because multiple topics hold the same name doesn't mean there is no primary topic. In regards to the actual nomination, step by step:
  • I don't see any indication that the WP:COMMONNAME of Fife is actually Fifeshire, or any of the other suggestions. This is backed by a look at the frequency of use of the various proposed alternatives^[1] - the only one with any impact is Fib, which incidentally is in use as a disambiguation page for various meanings of fib.
  • I don't see any indication that the term "fife/Fife" is universally used to refer to the instrument. It might have a storied history, but the indications are that the term is used far more frequently to refer to the location. The majority of the prominent results in a Google Search (private mode, non-UK) show Fife, while an analysis of Wikipedia's viewership for each page also indicates that Fife is more notable.^[2] - and, if I may also add a personal observation, I consider it doubtful that a comparatively obscure flute instrument will be more notable than a region with almost 400,000 people living in it. -- NoCOBOL(talk) 10:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

"I don't see any indication that the term "fife/Fife" is universally used to refer to the instrument" - what comes up in English dictionaries for the term "fife"? The place may have a large population, but it's a relatively large place; is this not taken into consideration? 'Fife' isn't a town or a city, it's a 'council area', with dozens of places inside it, comparing that large of an area to an instrument seems to me like comparing something to New York State, when it should be compared to New York City; not the best analogy but I think you can understand what I mean. Of course people use it more frequently, it seems to be a tourist destination with many areas inside it... "Comparatively obsure flute instrument"? Did you miss my explanation that the Old Guard Fife and Drum Corps are the official escort to the President of the United States, and perform throughout the USA, Canada, Europe and Australia? Does it not matter that the word 'fife' is a term used for the musical instrument, while the title "fife" is a name for the location? I think it's important to note that while 'fife' is the term for the musical instrument, it is the name of the location. :Therefor, the term 'fife' doesn't apply to the location (places have names, not 'terms').

By the criteria “long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term” it is the term (for the musical instrument) that should take precedence... am I missing something here? Thanks. Walterblue222 (talk) 23:15, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

If I can just say two things to this:

• 1. I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say in much of this; you seem to concede that the term is used more frequently in reference to the area, but then argue that this is an unfair comparison? If I am correct in my understanding, then the misunderstanding you have is that we are trying to be "fair", whatever that means. We are trying to put the most notable page in this location, with fairness not factoring into it.
• 2. You seem to be be under the impression that the exact and technical meaning of the "rules" is what we make decisions; that is, in fact, explicitly not true, as can be seen at WP:NOTBURO. In this case, even if the technical meaning of the rules could put "terms" ahead of names, that is not the case in reality, for the obvious reason of that would be silly - sometimes the name is more notable than the "term". For an example of this, see Barack, which sensibly redirects to Barack Obama rather than being used for Barack (brandy) - even though the former is a name and the later a term, it is still used as a redirect to the name because the name is far more notable and what far more people will expect when entering the term than the Hungarian brandy. -- NoCOBOL (talk) 06:25, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Wait, so it's based on notability now? I was under the impression that it was based on “long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term”; if this is the deciding factor, it is the term (for the musical instrument) that should take precedence. So is it significance, notability and educational value, or simply notability? If the former, what educational value does the place have? Also, the significance it has would include groups named for it, correct? Yet the organizations named for the area are named with "Fifeshire", not "Fife"... Walterblue222 (talk) 15:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Shorthand. Look, you seem to be falling into the trap of believing Wikipedia is a WP:BURO. I suggest you read that article, as well as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. In particular, I would suggest you note the sentence "While Wikipedia has no single criterion for defining a primary topic, two major aspects that editors commonly consider are these". On this specific topic, however, I would like to note that I don't believe you have even proven your fife meets the requirements of the specification you have been focusing; you have mentioned its claims to notability, but you have not explained why it is more notable (again, I am using notable here as shorthand) -- NoCOBOL (talk) 21:23, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

The entire first paragraph of this proposal explains the notable history and current application of the instrument... Walterblue222 (talk) 22:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

You've explained why it is notable, not why it is more notable than Fife - at least not to my satisfaction. Look, please just carefully read those two linked policy guides. All the issues here, assuming good faith, come to down to a lack of understanding of those guides, but you are new and that is understandable. -- NoCOBOL (talk) 06:59, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

I've been reading a lot of Wikipedia rules and guidelines and certainly have a lot left to learn. Thanks for the assistance. I've come across many conflicting rules and regulations on guideline pages though; one of the easiest examples I could give would be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules. This is extremely frustrating because I'm trying to abide by the rules and guidelines when explaining and supporting my argument, yet the opposition can just ignore them? If the opposition is not adhering to rules and guidelines, it doesn't matter, but if I don't adhere to them I get called out and directed to read more rules? Walterblue222 (talk) 14:58, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose Largely agree with NoCOBOL, who I think has comprehensibly demolished the case for a move. The one thing I would add is that pretty much no-one in Scotland refers to Fife as 'Fifeshire', I can only imagine that being said by some Etonian on a 1970s BBC politics show. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 11:41, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

  And nobody in England refers to it as Fifeshire to... Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:45, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

"There are many locations that have one title in the native language of the people inhabiting and a different title when other people refer to it in the English language. Japan is the English title for the East Asian country, but its inhabitants refer to it as Nippon or Nihon, not Japan." The same principle could be applied here... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walterblue222 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes there are many places that have native names and a different name in different languages, Fife isn't one that has a different name in England English than Scottish English, see my citations here. In fact the name is "Fife" in most other languages such as Catalan (instrument Pifre), Portuguese (instrument Pífano) and Italian (instrument Fiffaro). Yes it it Fìobha in Scottish Gaelic but you haven't cited any sources that is is not "Fife" in modern English. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:40, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

What exactly do you consider "modern" English? This seems open to interpretation...Walterblue222 (talk) 00:53, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. This boils down to: is the bit of Scotland or the instrument a primary topic. Despite the sterling efforts of the nominator, in my opinion the primary topic is the area of Scotland. In the meantime, I've substantially tidied up the page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:43, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

I didn't propose that the instrument take the primary topic; rather, that the disambiguation page be primary, as a compromise, and the location title being changed to be more specific. Walterblue222 (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. There are numerous links to the area Fife and a change would seem to need some better reason. And the place is clearly of greater importance than the instrument. Horis (talk) 16:24, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

I disagree. What are your grounds on stating that the place is "of greater importance" than the instrument? I didn't propose that the instrument take the primary page, but rather that the disambiguation page be primary. Walterblue222 (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose To suggest that the name of the council area is analagous to the Japan/Nippon example is absurd. The English name of the council area is Fife, it doesn't change whether you're an inhabitant or the BBC reporting in London. No one calls it Fifeshire unless they are living in the past (Stirlingshire, Kinross-shire, etc.) or like to add "-shire" to things for no good reason. Boothy m (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

...which is why this proposal is not to change the 'Fife' location page into 'Fifeshire'. This does nothing to disprove the fact that the location has a history of being referred to as 'Fifeshire'. Walterblue222 (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

• Comment I, and others, had a lengthy discussion with the proposer at Talk:Fife#'Fife'_-_Instrument_vs_Location?, pointing out the plainly inaccurate basis of their factual assertions, their requirement to provide valid support for them rather than an onus on others to “invalidate” them, methods of determining the primary topic and why this would indicate their propositions (they, initially at least, favoured the instrument as the PTopic) are without merit. As this proved fruitless and repetitive and the proposer seemed to wish to portray the disagreement as personal rather than factual, I decided to stand aside from this move discussion in the expectation that other users would inevitably raise similar evident flaws in the proposition and the hope that the proposer would thus be more receptive to the objections. Recent edits by the proposer, particularly this unexplained removal from above of the initial thread and of a link to the discussion at Talk:Fife, do not encourage me in this hope. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:12, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I initially favored (FAVORED, NOT "FAVOURED", SINCE WERE SPEAKING IN 'MODERN ENGLISH') the primary page to be the instrument. However, I submitted this proposal to be a compromise, even though I negated and invalidated the majority of your assertions suggesting the location should take precedence over the instrument. The reasons I explained to you were not without merit, as you falsely accuse. Fruitless and repetitive? Hardly. Nearly every response I gave to you included more and more information, and you chose to disregard anything you couldn't argue against. YOU began responding with personal attacks, and continued to provide insults rather than factual information, even after I requested you stop. You "decided to stand aside from this move discussion"? Well apparently not, but I've come to expect lies from you. I removed a section from the Fife talk page that I started, because it was being discussed on the other talk page - you're trying to spin this as a deceitful edit which suggests that once again, you're responding personally and trying to discredit me, instead of answering any of the many questions you dodged and refused to answer on the talk page. This kind of behavior is rude, uncouth, without merit, disrespectful and quite obviously personal. If you choose to respond (even though you falsely claimed that you "decided to stand aside", a blatant lie) you should do so with answers to the questions you refused to answer, instead of more personal attacks, insults and attempts to discredit my assertions based on personal opinion, instead of actually discussing the topic at hand. Oh, and you should probably refrain from lying again, if you're even able to do so. Walterblue222 (talk) 15:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Spelling "favored" without the "u" is American spelling, not simply modern English and in modern English the place is just "Fife". Mutt Lunker did not make any accusations or personal attacks, they just asked you to provide sources for you're assertions. Crouch, Swale (talk) 15:11, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

On the contrary, @Mutt Lunker: DID make accusations and personal attacks; he suggested that I "made this up", called my argument "utter nonsense", "fairly risible", "baseless learned proclamations" and stated that my suggestions are "grossly inaccurate factual claims" and that I "apparently misunderstood much of the posts above", despite the fact that I clearly and respectfully explained my logic and reasoning. These are not neutral remarks, and I don't appreciate the ridicule and personal insults. He falsely said that I "claim that "Fifeshire" is the common and actively preferred term" - I didn't claim this, and this was not my assertion, as I explained in detail to him earlier. You're correct regarding the American vs British spelling "favoured", but claiming that @Mutt Lunker: "did not make any accusations or personal attacks" is absolutely false. Walterblue222 (talk) 22:21, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Personal attacks are attacks on the person. These remarks and questions regard the patently incorrect or fanciful things you have said and for which you have provided no WP:RSs, not you. Patently incorrect or fanciful things are deprecated here, as you might imagine.

Also, one should avoid editing one's comments if they have been replied to already, as you did here. See WP:REDACT. It also explains how you can strike through text instead, so that it is still visible in its original context. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:07, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

"Personal attacks are attacks on the person" - you made false, insulting comments about me regarding things I said, none of which were "patently incorrect" or "fanciful". Your remarks absolutely constitute personal attacks.

I'll try to remember to strike through comments in the future; is there some rule regarding this, or is it just your preference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walterblue222 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

As I said, "See WP:REDACT." Mutt Lunker (talk) 00:58, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

I did. You conveniently only responded to half of my comment. Walterblue222 (talk) 01:04, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Otherwise this makes this post look off topic. Per WP:REDACT if anyone has already replied to or quoted your original comment, changing your comment may deprive any replies of their original context, and this should be avoided. So this isn't Mutt Lunker's personal preference. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:05, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Understood. The personal remarks from @Mutt Lunker: remain unaddressed. Walterblue222 (talk) 08:02, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Walterblue222 the alleged personal attacks were addressed here, while I understand that the choice of words may have been a bit harsh, they weren't directed at you as a parson but rather that you hadn't backed up you're assertions with reliable sources. Take a look at this post for example, noting the word "nonsense" used for "Insh Island". Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:22, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

The "alleged personal attacks" were NOT addressed; claiming that "these remarks and questions regard the patently incorrect or fanciful things you have said and for which you have provided no WP:RSs, not you" is all well and good but this does not by any means account for all of the insults and disrespectful comments made to me, about me, by @Mutt Lunker:. These personal attacks still have yet to be addressed. Walterblue222 (talk) 19:22, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

This supposed rationale for the repeat of the blanking of content in this talk page and its noting of a directly pertinent discussion on another has not the slightest validity. It would be highly premature even to archive it, particularly in light of this current discussion. Please self-revert its removal and if you still somehow believe there is a valid reason to erase it, discuss this and attain consensus before acting. Be glad you are being extended the benefit of the doubt on the grounds of inexperience. Please familiarise yourself with WP:WAR. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

---

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.

Moot now, because the conversation is closed, but for the record Walterblue222 (talk · contribs) was blocked indefinitely on 18 Feb 2019. Mathglot (talk) 19:48, 18 February 2019 (UTC)