Talk:Bowie

David Bowie

His inclusion is in my eyes undue weight. A list with people who have the last name Bowie is already included. "Also known as Bowie" doesn't make him stand out as anyone with that last name would be commonly called just "Bowie". There have been more (perhaps even more) famous persons named Bowie, for instance James Bowie who made me come to this page. So why name a musician and not him? Both are NPOV in my eyes, hence I removed it. Disagree? Discuss here.--Fogeltje (talk) 07:56, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not entirely -- he has performed and released albums as "Bowie" alone, which would justify the inclusion here as well as on the surname list. IMO, a case could also be made for including James Bowie here. older ≠ wiser 13:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is not his real name anyway.Motmit (talk) 18:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of an album with that name. I think that could warrant an entry under "Others", linking to aforementioned album (and not the person under Persons). Highlighting persons will always lead to discussion I'm afraid over someone finding a particular Bowie more notable than others. Hence I wanted to avoid it completely. However, if the majority thinks the name should stay, I won't go against. --Fogeltje (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't think there was an album titled Bowie. I was referring to albums such as Pin Ups (album) or Diamond Dogs, where his name appears prominently on the cover as simply "Bowie" rather than "David Bowie" as on some other albums. Of course there is also compilations such as The Best of Bowie, Best of Bowie, and Bowie – The Video Collection which by themselves are not ambiguous, but do indicate that the performer is commonly known as simply "Bowie". older ≠ wiser 01:19, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 November 2016

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 – Early close per WP:SNOW — JFG ^talk 18:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bowie → Bowie (disambiguation) – It's pretty hard to argue that David Bowie is the primary topic for "Bowie", just like how Richard Wagner, John Lennon and Paul McCartney are all the primary topics for their respective surnames; so I recommend redirecting "Bowie" to David Bowie's article. Unreal7 (talk) 18:31, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. You think that Bowie should redirect directly to David Bowie, ignoring all other meanings of that word? Bradv 19:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused because you say that "it's pretty hard to argue that David Bowie is the primary topic for Bowie". I would agree, and therefore am opposed to this move. Bradv 19:56, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - No book ever introduces David Bowie directly as "Bowie", since he isn't a mononym like "Stalin" or "Churchill". I don't believe that "Bowie" is even used anywhere here in Wikipedia article content either. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:29, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm usually in favor of less disambiguation, but this one I have to oppose. There are just too many other Bowies out there for me to support this, and I also don't think the singer is referred to solely by his last name enough, unlike Lennon or McCartney. The sparse page views for the basename (about 38 a day [1]) make me think there is no overwhelming need to move the DAB page away from the base name. Calidum ¤ 19:35, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Best of Bowie? Unreal7 (talk) 20:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Subject is not synonymous to their surname. Also, this type of surname/WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT association usually only occurs with artists and musicians from the Renaissance era; David Bowie is too modern to meet that criteria. Steel1943 (talk) 20:09, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. James Bowie/Bowie knife, where David got the name, are much too significant. Nohomersryan (talk) 01:29, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I would say the key difference here is that Wagner, Lennon and McCartney are much less likely to be ambiguous with another target, while Bowie is a comparatively common name for a number of other things. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "Bowie" on its own means a knife, not a person. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 21:13, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The knife and the frontiersman are pretty well-known too. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:42, 23 November 2016 (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.