Talk:David O'Keeffe (lawyer)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 22 April 2021[edit]

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. Supports and opposes are approximately balanced, but arguments for the move have a weaker basis in policy. WP:CONSISTENT has, to my knowledge, never been understood to apply across Wikipedias. Some tentative points have been made in the direction of this article being primary with respect to long-term significance, but this has not attracted consensus. (non-admin closure) Colin M (talk) 21:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]



David O'Keeffe (lawyer)David O'Keeffe – Suggest changing title from "David O'Keeffe (lawyer)" to "David O'Keeffe" as "David O'Keeffe" is the title for articles on the individual in 9 other languages on Wikipedia: French, Netherlands, Portuguese, Romanian, Polish, Slovene, Slovak, Italy, German. Also seems to create problems with Wikipedia Commons database connecting articles in the different languages. MarkHarper1 (talk) 18:24, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have fixed the broken Wikidata entry – Thjarkur (talk) 18:55, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is also David O'Keeffe (footballer). Both articles have the same low number of views (~30/month). – Thjarkur (talk) 18:59, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:NOPRIMARY. 162 etc. (talk) 19:05, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral. Although the lawyer does have an entry in ten other Wikipedias (in addition to the already-listed nine, there is also a listing in the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia), uncertainty may still remain as to whether his notability is sufficiently high for primary status over the footballer. —Roman Spinner (talkcontribs) 19:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the footballer gets a comparable number of views (24) than the lawyer (33)[[1]]. Crouch, Swale (talk) 07:58, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:NOPRIMARY. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I do not think the number of page views is the best criterion. Here the comparison is between a retired footballer player and a sitting federal judge who is also a very eminent legal scholar in Europe and the English-speaking world. I see the lawyer has also received several non-English awards for distinction as well as an English one. I hate these comparisons but I understand the OP's concern that an individual should have the same reference name in various language versions of Wikipedia and it can be confusing. Grotius2018 (talk) 15:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support David O'Keeffe (lawyer) is a legendary judge known in most English-speaking countries as well as in Central and Eastern Europe. If it is just a question of notability, I would say that they are both well-known in their own fields. The reason for coming down on the side of the lawyer and not the footballer is that the lawyer plays a very consequential role in public life and has done for a very long time.HarleyQuinn2020 (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support david o'keeffe (footballer) does not have the same international profile as david o'keeffe (lawyer), even in French-speaking countries!MarcDutheilDelaRochere (talk) 21:29, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The arguments put forth by the nominator seem completely irrelevant. What other Wikipedias choose to use as article titles should have no bearing on our choices at all. Am I missing something? Andrewa (talk) 23:18, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.