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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Seventh-day Adventist Church on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Seventh-day Adventist ChurchWikipedia:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist ChurchTemplate:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist ChurchSeventh-day Adventist Church articles
Can someone give context on that last sentence? Representatives aren't required to live in the district they represent. What's the issue there / how can we clarify?
dmesg—Preceding undated comment added by Dmesg (talk • contribs) 07:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
Moved as proposed with respect to the first proposal; moved to Bob Stump (Arizona politician, born 1971) as to the second. The "(Arizona politician)" title will redirect to the primary topic, being the U.S. Congressman, which restores an overall status quo ante that was changed without discussion. bd2412T00:05, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
– The article about the US Congressman was moved without discussion or comment back in 2016. The congressman is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC due to his 25+ years in the US Congress, otherwise Bob Stump would've been turned into a disambiguation page itself. In contrast, the Arizona state legislator and later cabinet-level administrator is less notable. However, disambiguating his article as "Arizona politician" is still ambiguous, due to the more famous Bob Stump also being from Arizona. Thus, I am proposing "born 1971" instead, similar to Barbara Bush (born 1981) being about a First Daughter in contrast to Barbara Bush being about the more famous First Lady. Arbor to SJ (talk) 21:51, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is a very unusual case. Although normally in a WP:TWODABS situation like this, it's best to have one article at the base name with a hatnote pointing to the other, in this case pageviews don't indicate a WP:primary topic, and while a Congressman might 'outrank' a more local politician in long-term significance, here we have two politicians from the same state with the same name who could easily be confused with each other by some people. I think this is a rare case where Bob Stump should be a dab page, for the benefit of readers, even though there are only two articles. As to the qualifiers, birth dates are almost never recommended except as a last resort, because most searchers are more likely to be looking for that fact than to know it in advance. Although the nom has a point that the current qualifiers are not ideal, I think the hatnotes on each article deal with that issue. Bob Stump (born 1971) could be a redirect, though. Station1 (talk) 22:50, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. 1) The congressman does appear to be the primary topic and Bob Stump redirects to him anyway. 2) We never, ever, use "U.S. Congressman" as a disambiguator, although simple lower-case "congressman" may be acceptable in some cases. 3) They were both politicians from and representing Arizona, so "Arizona politician" is no disambiguator at all. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:59, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree "congressman" is a better qualifier than "U.S. Congressman". I also agree "Arizona politician" is ambiguous; "Arizona Corporation Commissioner" might be better, as his highest office. Station1 (talk) 06:09, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is the preferred format per WP:NCPDAB for those rare cases where two people have identical occupations and there's no choice but to use a birth year, but in this case one can be called congressman and the other Corporation Commissioner, so I think that's more recognizable for most readers than a birth year. More importantly, though, if the title were changed to Bob Stump (Arizona politician, born 1971), what would we do with Bob Stump (Arizona politician)? To just leave it as a redirect wouldn't make much sense, since we rarely redirect a shorter title to a longer one, and to redirect it to the congressman would be even more confusing. Parenthetically disambiguated titles are rarely dab pages themselves, because they are considered incomplete disambiguation, but there would be no other dab page to redirect to if this RM is accepted. Station1 (talk) 07:01, 10 July 2018 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.
