Talk:Hartington, Derbyshire

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Derbyshire Low‑importance

The article on Hartington, Derbyshire is supported by the Derbyshire WikiProject, which is a collaborative effort to improve the quality and coverage of Derbyshire-related articles on Wikipedia.DerbyshireWikipedia:WikiProject DerbyshireTemplate:WikiProject DerbyshireDerbyshire

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	At least one photograph is included in this article
	This article has a map
	This article has an infobox
	This article needs statistical information to be added

Requested move 27 June 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: Moved — Amakuru (talk) 10:37, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hartington → Hartington, Derbyshire – Although it has more page views, this village has a smaller population than the town in Nebraska (and also has a smaller article), so I don't believe it is necessarily the primary topic. If this request is accepted, Hartington can become a disambiguation page — strangely, one doesn't currently exist, despite three other articles being linked to via a hatnote. Jellyman (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and "[the village] has more page views" per the nom. No need for dab page due to hatnotes. --В²C ☎ 22:37, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Page views is not solely what constitutes a primary topic. In any case, apart from a few spikes, both articles generally have similar page views. There is no unambiguously clear leader. There have been days in which the town in Nebraska has actually had more views; for example 19 May 2017 on which it had a 22-17 lead over the Derbyshire locality. There is no clear primary topic so a disambiguation is the sensible choice. AusLondonder (talk) 22:25, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. An open and shut case so far as I can see. The page view statistics support the name being ambiguous with no primary topic, and all other considerations point to there being no primary topic, and even if there were it's more likely to be the Nebraska town. Andrewa (talk) 03:08, 5 July 2017 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hartington, Derbyshire. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 11:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]