Talk:Columbine

Redlinks

I removed the redlink for "columbine project" as it has no article and no mention on WP. no disrespect for the play, etc, but please, write the article first, then add the title here.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 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: not moved -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:38, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Columbine → Columbine (disambiguation) – I have reverted a previously paste and move here, and have started this proper discussion, based on the original rationale posted on Talk:Columbine High School massacre I have copied below.[1] The short version from the request is that Columbine should be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Columbine High School massacre:

I was wondering about the plausibility of having a search for the word “Columbine” redirect to this page, and then having the current “Columbine” page (which says “Columbine may refer to”) move to a new “Columbine disambiguation” page that would be linked at the top of this page. I looked at the other results on “Columbine may refer to” after searching the word “Columbine” and they all seem very obscure and unnotable compared to the Columbine Massacre. I would venture to estimate that over 90% of searches with just the word “Columbine” on Wikipedia and the Internet at large are with the intent of finding sources related to the Columbine Massacre.

To me, it’s like how if you type “LeBron” or “Lebron”, Wikipedia automatically redirects you to the LeBron James Wikipedia page. Certainly, there are and have been other people with the name LeBron who have a Wikipedia page (even before LeBron James was well-known). But at some point in LeBron James’ basketball career, the Wikipedia community got discussed and decided that the name “LeBron” or “Lebron” is so uniquely tied to the identity of “LeBron James”, that the redirect was necessary. I feel the same way about the word “Columbine”.

(For those who aren’t familiar with LeBron James, he’s an American professional basketball player, considered to be one of the greatest basketball players of all-time, and arguably the best basketball player of all-time)

I feel very strongly that “Columbine” should redirect to “Columbine Massacre”. But I’d love to hear other opinions and thoughts regarding this, and especially your reasons too.

I am neutral in this issue. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:40, 14 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 04:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I think the flower Aquilegia is prominent enough that the school shooting isn't the primary topic. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:06, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, etc. - pageviews and long-standing educational value lead to the same conclusion Red Slash 02:12, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support - an excellent way to objective analyze this is to look at article traffic statistics. I did this and the page for the Columbine High School massacre, and other Wikipedia pages related to it, far outweigh all of the other pages using the word “Columbine”. The Columbine High School massacre Wikipedia page gets about 6,000 views per day. Out of pages with “Columbine” that are not related to the massacre, there’s one page that gets about 1,000 views per day, but all of the others are very insignificant, less than 100 views per day apiece. Mrbeastmodeallday (talk) 02:32, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

- Comment Please do not vote on your own move request, your nomination is already an implicit support._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Struck !vote, retained comment, nomination implies support per RM instructions. SITH (talk) 22:08, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Am I missing something? I don't see Mrbeastmodeallday listed as the nom of this proposal. @StraussInTheHouse:? @Zxcvbnm:? --В²C ☎ 01:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - Born2cycle, yes, I had to strike out their signature because a double signature in a nomination, even when quoted, breaks the relist function of the RM bot. SITH (talk) 09:43, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Born2cycle: Mrbeastmodeallday was the person who proposed this move on Talk:Columbine High School massacre. — Eru·tuon 10:13, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      - Well, in that case, with the signature removed (not merely struck out), and given the current nom is now explicitly neutral, I don't think the RM instruction against noms !voting applies. I mean, in a normal RM the proposal !counts as a supporting !vote, but in a proposal like this where the nom is neutral and the quoted support is unsigned, I don't think that should preclude the original now-anonymous nom from !voting. --В²C ☎ 20:24, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT as it is far and away the most popular topic for this name._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:24, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per interest. --Quiz shows 21:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - just counting the topics related to the shooting - the event, the school, the book, the documentary - there is enough ambiguity to necessitate this disambiguation page at primary. -- Netoholic @ 21:36, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per power~enwiki. The flower has considerable long-term significance. Dekimasuよ! 21:34, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per interest.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:45, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No real primary topic here. The flower is equally important. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:13, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The shooting would usually be searched for by its full name, in addition to the other separate topics such as the flower, there is Columbine High School the location of the shooting and Columbine, Colorado, the location of the school, which would be favoured by WP:DABCONCEPT. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:01, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose directing Columbine to Columbine High School massacre per comments above. (If any topic is primary, it presumably would be the flower on the grounds of long-term significance.) ╠╣uw [talk] 17:11, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting note: for those who have stated "per interest", please note that this isn't a vote, so you might want to elaborate your positions a little. SITH (talk) 04:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure "per interest" is supposed to refer to the relative amount of attention the article garners. Dekimasuよ! 06:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Concur. --В²C ☎ 01:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Let's serve the readers searching with "Columbine" and take them to the article they are most likely seeking. The few that are searching for the flower will be only one hatnote click away, no worse than if taken to the dab page. This is what WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT is all about. --В²C ☎ 01:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Aquilegia and Columbine, Colorado and Columbine (book) are actually called "C/columbine". These and Columbine High School combine to make "Columbine" an ambiguous name. Also nb WP:RECENTISM and WP:GEOBIAS. — AjaxSmack 03:25, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence has been presented showing that the massacre is the primary topic of "Columbine" alone. A few such claims have been made without evidence. However, higher page views for the massacre than for the flower or the town do not indicate that people are searching for the massacre with simply "Columbine" (just as we don't redirect "Hampshire" to "New Hampshire" even though the latter has more page views). Aquilegia (the flower) and Columbine, Colorado each get far more page views than the dab itself, so it is impossible to tell based upon dab page usage whether readers tend to be searching for the massacre. Dekimasuよ! 20:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good points. One other consideration is that a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT should be both obvious in meaning and convenient for editors. In this case, I think we do not want editors using Columbine as a shortcut way to wikilink to the massacre. We have bots that will catch if people link to a DAB page, and notify them to update their links, and I think that is the best way to ensure accuracy in the long term. -- Netoholic @ 22:33, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Per Dekimasu, need evidence that the great majority of people navigating to Columbine are expecting it to have information on the massacre. — Eru·tuon 00:19, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this move 2601:541:4500:1760:14FA:5AEA:3006:CE63 (talk) 12:13, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The CDP is named for the flower (which is the state flower of Colorado), the high school is named for the CDP, and the massacre is named for the high school. "Columbine" as short hand for the massacre is quite a derivative use. "Columbine" alone could refer to the flower or the town (among other topics). If the disambiguation age is moved away from the base title, there will be an accumulation of bad links to the base title (most likely intending the flower) that won't be getting disambiguated. It's completely unencyclopedic to have any links to "Columbine" as a short hand for the massacre, and we shouldn't be allowing undisambiguated bad links to persist just to cater to people who are too lazy to type anything more than "Columbine" to find to the massacre (said lazy people are almost all certainly aware that there is also a high school by that name, and given the existence of the high school, "Columbine" is not sufficient to specify the massacre). Plantdrew (talk)

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.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Columbina which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]