Talk:Antagonist (disambiguation)

This page should be moved to Antagonist (disambiguation) and Antagonist would be the page title for Antagonist (literature). Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually pondering this too. Initially, that's what I thought, but then I also thought about how Receptor antagonist is a pretty common usage of the term. That may just be my science bias talking, though, as, looking through the first few pages of links to the disambiguation page, most of the reference do seem to be towards the literary reference.

At the same time, I don't know if we can legitimately say that one is the primary topic over the other (and if we can't, I don't feel comfortable making one as so just because the majority of the links to the page are about one of the topics). I don't think I can give a wholly unbiased opinion on that topic (not that I want to be biased, but I can't see it in a neutral light), so some more opinions would probably be good. -- Natalya 18:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should I leave word at WT:WPDIS about this discussion? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:19, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably a good place to get other opinions (and remember, you can always be bold and go ahead and post there!) -- Natalya 00:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Antagonist. The result of the discussion was not moved.

can we highlight receptor antagonist?

I think receptor antagonist is probably the second-most-common usage of the word "antagonist" (and probably first on the web), and the other uses are, at best secondary.

In particular, I believe antagonist (medical) to be an article created entirely by mistake. While there might or might not have been a time when "antagonist" was used to mean "drug which cancels out another drug", that's emphatically not what receptor antagonist means: my understanding is many drugs and substances are used by themselves because of their action as (receptor) antagonists, and that the corresponding agonist might not be usable as a drug itself.

Can we reorder, highlight, include a direct link to receptor antagonist on antagonist, and maybe delete antagonist (medical) entirely to avoid misunderstanding? Is there a problem with redirecting antagonist drug and antagonist (drug) to receptor antagonist, since that's overwhelmingly how they are defined?

RandomP (talk) 16:52, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Antagonist which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:31, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]