Talk:Canmore

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alberta which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. 117Avenue (talk) 00:41, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Canmore, Alberta

Disambiguation pages commonly point first and foremost to whatever is most important. The town of Canmore is much more important than all the other things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoshq (talk • contribs) 21:03, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Which is why it's on top. Have you made yourself familiar with MOS:DAB? 117Avenue (talk) 00:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

There are plenty of disambiguation pages which separate the most important/common page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoshq (talk • contribs) 00:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

That is when the primary topic occupies the article title, and a separate disambiguation is created to list the other uses, for example see Calgary (disambiguation). Also, your changes are incorrect, you can't just start a page with saying "Canmore, Alberta, a town in Canada", it would read "Canmore is a town in Alberta, Canada. Canmore may also refer to." However, I do agree with you that the Albertan town is the primary topic, and should occupy this title, see the above section. But because the previous discussion was lumped into a larger one, I feel that Canmore wasn't given a fair shake, so I invite to the new move discussion, below, that would move Canmore, Alberta to Canmore. 117Avenue (talk) 05:07, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I read the MOS page and it does not state a preference for this. I am following the example set by other pages - for instance, if you type "Baltimore" into the search box, you get the city of Baltimore. If you then click on the disambiguation link, you get Baltimore the place separate and distinct from the rest. That is exactly what I am doing with Canmore. So, User 117Avenue, you are being abusive on this topic and I ask that you stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoshq (talk • contribs) 19:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Did you even read my last comment? What you have said confirms what I just said. 117Avenue (talk) 20:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

• Canmore → Canmore (disambiguation)
• Canmore, Alberta → Canmore

– According to this page, Canmore only refers to three things, a town of a population of 12,226, an online database only notable for two sentences and an average of 30 views a day, and members of a noble house who don't even have Canmore in their name. Canmore, Alberta is the only thing in this list that would occupy the name Canmore, the database uses a different spelling, and the people are of course under their official names. It is suggested in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Canada-related articles)#Places that any incorporated place in Canada may move to an undisambiguated title if there is no other uses of that title. I would also like to propose that the town is the primary use of the word Canmore, as the database seems to be not that important, and the monarchs may not often be referred to by their nicknames. 117Avenue (talk) 05:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support – to add to the above, a search of "Canmore" at Google Earth yields Canmore, Alberta. Hwy43 (talk) 06:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC) agree with the above... on a side, from a geographic community perspective, a search of "Canmore" at Google Earth yields Canmore, Alberta as the primary geographic community, so I doubt there is another community out there with the same name (not currently on the dab page), that could compete with Canmore, Alberta for primary topic. Hwy43 (talk) 21:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm supporting, but considering that Canmore, Alberta is the only town/geographic feature listed on the dab page, it's hardly surprising that a Google Earth search yielded the town in Alberta (and does nothing to prove primary topic). Jenks24 (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Yeah, Google Earth doesn't mean anything, but a Google search would. 117Avenue (talk) 21:00, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
      • Jeepers guys. So I missed qualifying with the perspective from which my comment was made. Is half past midnight local time too late for me to edit? Do you recommend a curfew? ;o) Notwithstanding its current contending articles are not geographic features, I've learned from past dab-related moves involving communities that it is important to confirm that the subject community is the only community with that name, or the primary topic of communities of the same name. Hwy43 (talk) 21:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support. Clearly the primary topic. Perhaps CANMORE should be moved CANMORE (online database) as well? Jenks24 (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
  • That would be unnecessary disambiguation, and fails WP:D#Deciding to disambiguate. Canmore (online database) should be created as a redirect though. 117Avenue (talk) 21:00, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose. A primary topic is much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined. Not the case here: this town is somewhat less discussed than the Kings of Scotland for which it was named. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose a town of 12 thousand people is struggling to be the primary meaing of anything, the alternative meanings would have to be pretty obscure to justify this. This is not the case, Malcolm III of Scotland is often referred to by his cognomen of Malcolm Canmore, he is an important figure for several reasons, the first king to rule with stability over roughly Scotland's present borders, arguably the founder of a Canmore dynasty, and a character in Shakespeare's Macbeth. PatGallacher (talk) 00:17, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose keep it as it is right now. Personally I hearded of Canmore being used for the Scottish royal house but I'd never knew there was a town by that name.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 05:32, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.