This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Composers, a group of editors writing and developing biographical articles about composers of all eras and styles. The project discussion page is the place to talk about technical and editorial issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!ComposersWikipedia:WikiProject ComposersTemplate:WikiProject ComposersComposers
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music
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.
Giacomo Benvenuti (composer) → Giacomo Benvenuti – A disambiguation page was recently created and this page was moved without discussion by Ortizesp under an argument of WP:NOPRIMARY. However, I think there is a clear primary in this case. The composer and musicologist are the subject of numerous scholarly works in a google books, google scholar, etc. with many entries in various music encyclopedias/general encyclopedias published in Italy/ academic works across more than a century of time. For example, here is a rather lengthy encyclopedia entry in Italian that is viewable without subscription access: https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/giacomo-benvenuti_(Dizionario-Biografico)/# The footballer is an obscure minor and recent sports figure. I think its clear based on the published literature that the composer is the WP:PRIMARY target. I further note that disambiguation policy is not to create a dab until there are a minimum of three entries. There is no need for a dab page, just a hat note.4meter4 (talk) 14:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Reading Beans02:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – especially considering that the sources at the footballer's article don't even establish notability. It looks like the composer is subject to numerous articles solely devoted to him; I don't see any coverage close to that for the footballer. Aza24 (talk)15:48, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, I'm not convinced that the composer has enough page views or long-term significance to be PRIMARY. I'm fairly confident the total pageviews for the footballer in one day will be close to the total the composer gets in a month.--Ortizesp (talk) 17:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ortizesp I'm not confident the footballer would survive an WP:AFD. I am planning on taking it there once this discussion is closed regardless of the outcome unless some sources with significant coverage are added to that article. Currently, the article does not meet WP:SIGCOV or WP:SPORTSBASIC. Probably created WP:TOOSOON.4meter4 (talk) 17:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't create the page, but quickly glanced through refs and think there is enough for an article. I can probably spruce it up tomorrow. Ortizesp (talk) 17:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Crouch, Swale Unfortunately it didn't occur to me until Aza24 raised the issue, and I don't want to be accused of WP:FORUMSHOPPING. Best to let this play out. @Ortizesp I'd just like to point out that I find the accusation that the composer doesn't have longterm significance ridiculous. That's like saying someone with an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography lacks longterm significance. We generally have given precedence to UK articles in that reference work in PRIMARY discussions on UK people. The Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani (see url above) is Italy's equivalent reference work for that country, and given that both are Italians I would think we should give precedence to major Italian language reference works when determining PRIMARY significance.4meter4 (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree to disagree. Long-term significance is important, and so is page views. If you aren't clearly overwhelming in both, I generally don't think there's a PRIMARYTOPIC. Ortizesp (talk) 18:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The composer page is 14 years old, and is therefore not getting traffic generated by bots. New pages often get high volumes of traffic because they appear in bot generated news feeds of page patrollers, and wikiprojects. It's normal to see a high volume of page traffic on pretty much any newly created page regardless of topic. I don't think you can get accurate data on comparative page viewing between these two topics until this article is at least a year old. I also note the skew towards WP:RECENTISM bias in the argument being made here.4meter4 (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bot traffic isn't in the thousands for any page that I know of, the Sammarinese footballer played a big part in a historic game for them already. I'm fairly certain the page views are accurate. I don't anticipate the page will have that many page views for a long long time (if ever), but I reckon he'll average more page views than the composer from here on out. Ortizesp (talk) 18:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ortizesp. When considering page views in the past few days - which favour the footballer - there is a clear absence of primary topic. There is nothing about the composer to suggest he enjoys greater long-term significance, particularly given that his 5-year page-view total up to 31 August was only 1,606 - less than one hit per day. — Amakuru (talk) 11:15, 23 September 2024 (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.
