Talk:Pour

On 3 December 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Pour (disambiguation). The result of the discussion was not moved.

PROD or not

It's a tricky one - such a common word, so many titles starting "Pour ...", and a genuine scientific concept at Pour point (not in the page when it was PRODded), but to my surprise in scanning the first 500 hits I found no acronym for the "Political Orgnisation for United Revolution" or similar, and I quite take the point that Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Neutral. PamD 10:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 December 2023

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 22:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pour → Pour (disambiguation) – To redirect Pour to Pouring. Steel1943 (talk) 17:39, 3 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 00:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per mon—blindlynx 00:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom, and I haven't seen any possible controversy about this move. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a bit of a WP:NOTDICT situation. What reason do we have to believe that the average reader would benefit from short-circuiting this, when e.g. https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Pour barely renders (so little traffic, gets mostly filtered) and Mass views for 'pour' shows another topic with more traffic than pouring? Granted the pouring article was only written late this year, but still, why do we think people would have trouble navigating to it from the current MOS:DABCOMMON form? (Oppose) --Joy (talk) 09:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and there's another topic with more traffic at Mass views for the surname. This is another case where WP:NAMELIST probably makes navigation worse. --Joy (talk) 09:38, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Very obvious. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:NOTDICT. The content at pouring is pretty-much useless. This page simply lists the people whose name is Pour, which is the best thing it can do. — Amakuru (talk) 11:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternate move To Pour (name) as this is just a WP:PTM list of people's names. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
People named some way are not partial title matches, human naming schemes are natural disambiguation and the average reader recognizes that ambiguity, and commonly uses these to navigate to people, we should not make that process harder. --Joy (talk) 11:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but no. This is not aligned with the guidance at WP:NAMELIST Lists of people by surname are absolutely partial title matches, almost by definition, with the exception of people commonly known mononymously by the surname. That said, this particular page at present is nothing more than a surname list and should be categorized as such rather than as a disambiguation page -- and it should remain at the current title. older ≠ wiser 12:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NAMELIST is a guideline for which I've found so many failures in the last year, it's becoming a bit of a meme. Certainly the mononymous uses are the most ambiguous ones, but the others are ambiguous as well, and continuing to pretend that our readers don't habitually refer to people by their names ambiguously is going to continue to make our navigation suck for those readers and have the effect of making biographies harder to navigate to for no real reason. --Joy (talk) 16:51, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There have been many bad decisions made about splitting or merging dab-like pages (many of which might not be aligned with the guidance at WP:NAMELIST or MOS:DABNAME or which may be based on an unnecessarily restrictive reading of these guidelines). But it's been discussed quite many times and the general agreement has been that non-mononymous name-holders are partial title matches. You can continue to beat the drum to change this, but don't misrepresent it. older ≠ wiser 17:44, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that that's the 'general agreement', that is not the experience I've had over the last few years in numerous discussions, and as more time passes the more data points we obtain to indicate that this kind of an understanding of reader navigation is just not useful. --Joy (talk) 08:07, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The 'general agreement' is represented by what is currently in WP:NAMELIST and MOS:DABNAME. older ≠ wiser 12:54, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If your perception differs, perhaps you need to try to gain consensus to change the guidance. Until then it is little more than one editor's opinion. older ≠ wiser 17:50, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Joy and Amakuru. No such user (talk) 11:39, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The dict-def article on pouring is of little use to anyone. But as mentioned above, this page at present is a simple list of people by surname, not a disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 12:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: It is a valid name page, and it is difficult to imagine a reader coming her to find out about "pouring": one searches an encyclopedia under nouns, not verbs. PamD 13:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's plausible that some people also search for verbs, but it doesn't matter here because as long as we don't have evidence that an overwhelming amount of people do that, there's little rationale for replacing this with a primary redirect. --Joy (talk) 16:55, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support with revised name to Pour (name). 120.28.224.22 (talk) 02:26, 18 December 2023 (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.