Talk:Allison Williams

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers

	Biography portal 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 supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.

Connecticut Low‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut 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.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

November 30 to December 6, 2014 (12th)

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

No consensus, 19 January 2018, to Allison Williams, see discussion.
Moved, 16 October 2024, from Allison Williams (actress) to Allison Williams, see discussion.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Allison Williams (actress). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130417095057/http://gawker.com:80/5590877/brian-williams-daughter-plays-sensual-ta-in-college-musical-web-series to http://gawker.com/5590877/brian-williams-daughter-plays-sensual-ta-in-college-musical-web-series

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:54, 10 October 2016 (UTC) – Paine Ellsworth ^put'r there 19:50, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

She looks Syrian. 216.195.89.58 (talk) 17:11, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish ?

Is she Jewish? - like the other "Girls" girls ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4C80:40:493:CA1F:66FF:FE49:EA0E (talk) 19:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 January 2018

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: no consensus. See no general agreement to this proposal at this time. ♥Happy ♥Hearts ♥Day! (closed by page mover) Paine Ellsworth ^put'r there 19:57, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– When I created the disambiguation page for Allison Williams in March of 2013 (prior to which point the name had pointed to Allison Williams (Miss West Virginia)), it wasn't so clear who the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC was among the women with this name. By now, though, I would say it's quite clear. She was second-billed in one of the top films of 2017. The first two pages of Google results are about her, and the ones not about her on the third page aren't about either of the other Williamses. On News results, the first result about the reporter is on page three. User:SebastianHelm points out that there are more incoming links on WP for the reporter, but that's a metric fundamentally skewed by systemic bias. Outside of Wikipedia, the actress is clearly better-known than the reporter. (Also pinging Iffy.) — PinkAmpers &^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 16:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Primefac (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose a common name, being moderately more known than the others doesn't really justify this move. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:57, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Choosing a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC when there isn't an absolutely clear-cut one is a guaranteed way of accumulating bad links, which is unhelpful to readers and is damaging for the project. As an illustration, Tetrahedron is beyond doubt WP:PRIMARYTOPIC; but it still collects links which should be to Tetrahedron. Narky Blert (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom and 90% of pageviews which show her to be the primary topic. The concern about bad incoming links is valid, but I think is outweighed by getting the large majority of searchers directly to the article they want without having to go through a dab page. Station1 (talk) 22:27, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The concern about bad incoming links is valid". I assume, then, that you will watchlist the page and fix them? Someone will have to. Narky Blert (talk) 01:30, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, because it's such a relatively minor problem. First, an editor would have to link to Allison Williams without checking that it's the right article, then a reader would have to click on that link, and even when that happens once in a while, the only difference will be that the reader will have to click on a hatnote instead of a dab page. Considering that the reporter and contestant get 400 views per day combined, versus 4,000 for the actress, I think that far more people are adversely affected by the current setup. Station1 (talk) 03:44, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"First, an editor would have to link to Allison Williams without checking that it's the right article"

That happens 400-600 times every single day for DAB pages alone. See WP:TDD#Today's highlights. Narky Blert (talk) 21:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know what percentage of those are caused by dab pages taking up the title that should be occupied by the primary topic? For instance, I notice on the page you linked to that the dab page Uber has 3 incorrect incoming links, all of which are intended for the primary topic Uber (company). Station1 (talk) 22:37, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Do we know what percentage of those are caused by dab pages taking up the title that should be occupied by the primary topic?"

Why should the company be WP:PRIMARYTOPIC? If you want to fill Wiki up with bad links, go ahead. I don't. I fix 10 or so bad links to "WP:PRIMARYTOPICs" every day. And that's just from having suspicions about innocent-looking links in articles where an editor has linked to a DAB page, because if they didn't check one link they most likely didn't check any. I found one page today which was a threefer - one link to a DAB page, two other links in the same sentence to surname pages. I think my record may be a fivefer. Narky Blert (talk) 04:26, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you have some time to spare, I suggest that you look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Esplanade and sort out one or two of the pages where the link should be to Esplanade, Kolkata. There's only about a dozen or a hundred of them. Narky Blert (talk) 04:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I said from the start, I acknowledge your concern about bad links is valid. But do you acknowledge that about 44 people per day landing on a dab page instead of the article they want is also a problem? Either way, some people are going to land on the wrong page and have to click on a hatnote or dab page entry. It's just that the larger number get to the right page the first time if primary topics are at their correct title. Station1 (talk) 07:09, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have vacated the NAC and relisted this discussion. Primefac (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per In ictu oculi and Narky Blert. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 23:41, 27 January 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 16 October 2024

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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Frost 16:53, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

– Although this proposal previously resulted in a no consensus verdict in 2018, time has shown the actress is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, supported by search engine results and pageview statistics. FishLoveHam (talk) 17:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, overwhelming PRIMARYTOPIC in term of page views, and likely long-term significance.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, seems primary with 93% of all-time pageviews. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 19:22, 17 October 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.