Talk:Hollister (surname)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Hollister (family name) → Hollister (surname) – Move to take advantage of the disambiguation potential of the surname extension. When I tried to disambiguated a Hollister with dablink by selecting Hollister (family name) dablink did not pull down a list of people to select from, like it usually does. Not knowing the technical details, I don't know if this was from the former lack of the use of the Surnames template on this article or the article name or both. Regardless, I find the term "surname" preferable, and if the family is demonstrably a single entity, then the form "House of Hollister" or "Hollister Family" works better. Here, the surname's use is diverse enough that Hollister (surname) seems the best choice. Relisted. Andrewa (talk) 05:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC) --Bejnar (talk) 23:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting. I don't understand the above rationale at all, and note that this is seeking to reverse a previous move [1]. The user who performed this move is still active in English Wikipedia, so I'll give them a heads-up. Andrewa (talk) 05:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I think the move rationale means that templates such as Template:Surname links are designed to use "(surname)" as the default parameter, and articles about English family names that need disambiguation are consistently placed at "X (surname)" (see Category:Surnames for examples). Besides, Christian names used in successive generations are also called "family names". The suggested target is recognisable, natural, more precise, more concise and more consistent than the current title. DrKiernan (talk) 15:00, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- This is the standard format for such articles. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:58, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.