Talk:1979 Challenge Cup

Comments

This article was disambiguated without justification. Regardless of the size of article, The Challenge Cup is, has only ever been and for all likelihood, will only ever be a Rugby League competition. Anything would need to be in brackets, but not the first, and most widely known trophy in club rugby of both codes.Fleets (talk) 16:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

There was a legitimate justification to to be bold and make a disambiguation page: I did not see a reason of either a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC or WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT either on the talk page or in an edit summary (see WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY).Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

@Fleets: You are saying that the 1979 rugby Challenge Cup is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here, but you need to discuss that first as a requested move to get consensus. For now, I have reverted it to the (perfectly legitimate) dab page. — Gorthian (talk) 07:36, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I would state it categorically, and the rm would be needed for the dab. I understand your procedural position though. I would imagine it would be a cake walk, now there is something of value there.Fleets (talk) 09:19, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

The disambiguation was flawed in another way as it is a rugby league competition, not a rugby competition, but I have moved the material to my sandbox, but not ammended the disambiguation page as I wouldn't imagine that it would be around for too long.Fleets (talk) 09:36, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 21 January 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. There appears to be no consensus for a retitling of this page. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Dane ^talk 22:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

---

1979 Challenge Cup → ? – Removal of disambiguation page now that there is an article about the primary topic. Return of material that was undone to follow procedure. Fleets (talk) 09:39, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. I still do not see a justification that the rugby league competition is the primary topic (see WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY). A simple Google search on "1979 Challenge Cup" gets far more results on the ice hockey series. Just because the rugby competition itself is older, "Historical age" is not a good indicator, per that guideline. Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose: At least the first 20 non-wikipedia related Google hits when searching for "1979 Challenge Cup" is in regards to the NHL All-Stars vs. the USSR (at least while searching from a U.S.-based IP address). It was an extremely well covered series in the media in both the U.S. and the Soviet Union, especially with it taking place during the Cold War. While I am sure the rugby league is also well covered outside the U.S., I don't see any evidence that it should universally be the primary topic on the English language WP. The dab page is fine for now, but almost all evidence I have seen (I even attempted a search from a non-U.S. IP) seems to point as the ice hockey tournament being overwhelmingly the primary topic and the page you are creating should probably just have disambiguation statement at the top. Yosemiter (talk) 02:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Wow, did not expect that at all. Bizarre, strange but true. Once again rugby league has failed to publicise itself sufficiently to demonstrate the ownership of it's own competition.Fleets (talk) 07:26, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

The hockey series was an international event and the NRFL cup was based entirely in the UK. The hockey series was tournament of All-Stars (mostly Canadians) of one of the most media covered leagues in the world and it is still talked about because they lost to the USSR, especially in a time when the Soviets were not playing in the NHL. It shouldn't be that surprising that it was more covered. Yosemiter (talk) 16:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

• Comment The articles relating to the rugby league tournament follow a consistent naming pattern (for example 1965 Challenge Cup, 2014 Challenge Cup), the 1979 article is the only one with the 'rugby' disambiguation in the title. Keeping in line with the other articles I would probably lean towards making the rugby article the primary topic at 1979 Challenge Cup with a disambiguation for the ice hockey article, since it was a one-off event. 86.3.174.49 (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I would rebuttal with that rugby challenge cup series is also incomplete for years that do not cross with the one-off hockey series. I will further added page view statistics for the month of December 2016 to be an average of 32 visits per day for the hockey series and 4 visits per day for the 1978–79 NRFL season page where the content on the 1979 Challenge cup currently directs to (the 2014 Challenge Cup, an actual Challenge Cup page, had an average of 6). I am not sure naming conventions have anything to do with WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but it seems pretty clear which one is most commonly searched for, visited, and documented. Yosemiter (talk) 03:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Not denying that the hockey event was at least as notable as that year's rugby league event, although December isn't a particularly good month to use for a comparison since it is right in the middle of the rugby league off-season when interest is likely to be lowest (a similar analysis of 2014 Challenge Cup from July-September 2016 had 25 pageviews per day for example). It just seems a little odd to have a disambiguation on just one of the 100+ articles for the rugby league competition, again not sure if this is relevant to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC or not, it just seems a little odd. Maybe due to the fact that Challenge Cup is a primary topic and the articles relating to specific Cups should presumably be a continuation of that rather than requiring individual disambiguation.86.3.174.49 (talk) 03:55, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
      • Over the same time period then (July-Sept), the '79 hockey page had 35/day and the 78-79 NRFL season had 5, and that is during hockey offseason. But what does it matter if the title of the page has a disambiguator. Is either event going to linked where someone might accidentally link to the wrong page? Being far enough in the past, it is more likely the events will only ever be linked again when a template is added. If you do a standard internet search, both pages are the top results so it should be easy to differentiate. Hatnotes at the top of each page would also easily identify and direct the user to the page they are looking for. Yosemiter (talk) 14:32, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
        • It doesn't matter, practically it doesn't matter too much at all since, as you say, these are historical events with minimal traffic, I just think it might follow that since Challenge Cup is the primary topic and this is a specific instance of that topic that the same primary topic would therefore apply without the need for disambiguation. Again, the hockey event was a one-off whereas the rugby league event was one of 100+ stagings of the tournament, so attempting to gauge interest via any type of direct comparison is somewhat redundant. It's just a case of clarifying whether the rugby league event takes precedence due to it being a staging of the primary topic of Challenge Cup, I don't know if it does or not but it seems strange to have a disambiguation for just one of 100+ articles relating to this. 86.3.174.49 (talk) 00:44, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

---

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.