Talk:Barrios

Requested move

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. 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. Trying to read between the lines on the discussion indicates that there's a possible consensus for moving the surname list to Barrios (surname) and redirecting the base name to Barrio as the primary topic, but I'll let that be proposed explicitly to confirm. -- JHunterJ (talk) 21:01, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barrios → Barrio (disambiguation) – I've just finished disambiguating 23 incoming links here. 21 of them were plurals of barrio, and it appears to be the primary topic. In light of this fact, and that some of the names already listed here are the surname Barrio rather than Barrios, I propose moving this dab to Barrio (disambiguation), changing Barrios to redirect to Barrio, changing Barrio (surname) to redirect to the People section of the dab, and changing the hatnote on Barrio to reflect the changes. Nick Number (talk) 19:04, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Oppose many of the uses on this page use "Barrios". Instead Barrios (disambiguation) would be the proper location for this page. The surname people can be moved to Barrios (surname), and the ones that use "Barrio" should be moved to Barrio (surname). -- 70.49.127.65 (talk) 04:25, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Ugh, what a mess. This page had no valid dab page entries per WP:PTM and MOS:DAB. So I changed it to a surname page. And put merge tags on for it and Barrio (surname), because it had so many "Barrio"s. I created Barrio (disambiguation), but if the two name pages are merged it wouldn't be necessary. I think the incoming links of the plural form of barrio are actually an argument for having Barrios redirect to Barrio, with appropriate hatnote there. ENeville (talk) 21:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. First let me commend Nick for the extraordinary job he has done in fixing the whole Barrio, Barrios, dab, etc., mess. Thnigs are considerably more intuitive and logical now.

However I prefer if the two surnames (Barrio and Barrios) were not merged. The reason is that, while --again-- Nicks intention is a noble one, when it comes to surnames, the fact that one surname looks like the plural of the other, is not a good reason for a merge; they are indeed two totally different surnames. I mean,,,,,,, names are names, and the fact that one ends in an "s" while another otherwise identical one does not, has nothing to do with plurality: they are as different as Smith and Rodriguez (or Rodriguez and Rodrigues for that matter). BTW, I would agree that "barrio" (a district) and "barrios" (several districts) coincide on the the same page (via redirects or what have you); but I guess that is not the issue here. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 21:54, 30 June 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.[reply]

It was actually I who shuffled the content and pages, for whatever it's worth. I'm agnostic on the merge of articles on names, having proposed it based on information already on Barrios, but we should probably discuss the merits of a merge in a separate discussion, in a separate section. ENeville (talk) 17:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I knew that - was just trying to simplify things a bit. Nick deserves honorific mention for his nobleness; you do too. ;-) Mercy11 (talk) 23:40, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The current situation looks fine to me except that people with the name Barrio should be removed from Barrios if there's no reason for them to be here. I don't see any reason to merge the pages. Theoldsparkle (talk) 13:50, 12 July 2012 (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.