Talk:Colonel Blood (disambiguation)

Requested move

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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move. -- tariqabjotu 22:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Colonel Blood → Colonel Blood (disambiguation) – The Irish colonel, who was the only known person in recorded and chronicled history to have "successfully managed" to lay his hands upon the English Royal Crown Jewels in His Majesty's Tower of London, in an attempt to steal them, is surely and arguably much more of a primary topic than some relatively obscure Union colonel from and during the American Civil War. -- KC9TV 04:03, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – lame rationale. Dicklyon (talk) 06:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: You haven't provided any evidence to back-up you're claims and surely and arguably much more of a primary topic than some relatively obscure Union colonel is just your opinion. Zarcadia (talk) 10:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Colonel Blood should definitely redirect to Thomas Blood, a very famous historical figure who was invariably known as "Colonel Blood". To say that this is "just your opinion" is laughable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:31, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trouts all around—nom for not providing evidence, and Dicklyon and Zarcadia for not looking it up. Indeed Thomas Blood gets significantly more views than James Blood, even including the latter's redirect with his title. I had never heard of either of these men, but it took me all of 30 seconds to learn that Thomas gets over 15 times as many views as James. --BDD (talk) 17:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This falls into the category of "the blatantly obvious" in the history of England-and-Wales, Scotland and Ireland, so much so that it would not had normally required any (further) evidence at all. I was thinking that I were stating such (e.g., that "the Sun" usually means the [Star] in the Solar System, rather than the British "red-top" populist right-wing tabloid (and pornographic) newspaper), not realising (realizing) that the human, historical, political and geo-political divergences are as such that there is now such a state of disconnect across the Seas, at the two different sides of the Atlantic. -- KC9TV 01:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still oppose – there's no reason to hijack a perfectly good disambig page with a primarytopic claim. Thomas Blood is already well enough represented on it; the ambiguous term should go to the disambig page. Dicklyon (talk) 23:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - @Dick, normally yes, but in this case I'm not sure it is ambiguous, as far as I can see "Colonel James Blood" is always mentioned first under his full name, as a free-love radical, wheras Thomas Blood is sometimes really known as "Colonel Blood" period, i.e. without mention of "Thomas." + I have added Talk tags to both bios about this RM and reflist template and sources to James Blood which had none. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Having done a lot of the early content-building work on the Thomas Blood article (motivated by the fact he is a distant ancestor of mine), I would prefer to see a dab page. It has been demonstrated that there is sufficient confusion around "Colonel Blood" to necessitate a clear dab page would be more useful than redirects that require users to delve into the article to ascertain why they were sent there and what link the individual (or film!) has to the search string "Colonel Blood". Dick G (talk) 10:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Changed from neutral to support following Rjgibb comment. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:07, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Fascinating subject with global appeal, seems to be the primary topic. Andrewa (talk) 09:01, 28 December 2012 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.