Talk:John Penrose

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.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

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

Biography: Politics and Government

	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
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: articles moved. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Penrose → John Penrose (disambiguation) — This person was the primary meaning, when he was "demoted" a couple of years ago I said we might have to review this in the light of his parliamentary career. Since then he has been re-elected and become a junior minister in the UK govt., not very important but the others are all fairly obscure figures only just above the threshhold of notability. He is now the primary meaning. PatGallacher (talk) 21:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Penrose (politician) → John Penrose

I simply don't see the need for the move. There are no pages that incorrectly link to the disambiguation, and plenty that correctly link to John Penrose (politician). I think this move is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist and will just result in unnecessary work fixing links on a number of other pages. I would rather keep the disambiguation page as-is. --Simple Bob^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 10:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support – This man is clearly the most common meaning now. Of the others, one doesn't even have an article, two are stubs, and the other is barely more than one. What's more, there is nothing about those others to suggest that any of those articles will ever be expanded a whole lot. If anyone comes to Wikipedia searching for "John Penrose", it is far likelier than not that she is searching for the MP and government minister than the others (perhaps put together). I'm afraid I don't see anything to Bob's point about having to change links. AWB or an actual script could take care of the issue with ease. As for the need, such need comes from guidelines and convenience for editors rather than incorrect links. I don't actually see how incorrect links are even remotely relevant to the question of whether the politician is the primary meaning of "John Penrose" for WP purposes. -Rrius (talk) 11:57, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reply I also think that Simple Bob misunderstands some of the issues associated with the concept of primary topic on Wikipedia, see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Current links are irrelevant, all that matters is that one person is by a clear margin the best known of this name. As it happens, I have had a look, and no links will have to be changed as a result of this move, "John Penrose (politician)" will be a redirect to "John Penrose". PatGallacher (talk) 14:15, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC: "much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined". Last month there were just 604 views of the politician and 339 views of the other people. In my opinion this does not qualify as "much more likely". Tassedethe (talk) 15:16, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics aren't everything, as some people have said before during these discussions. PatGallacher (talk) 15:18, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And in the event, don't the statistics support me? Viewers are about twice as likely to view the subject of this article as all of the others combined. How is this not the primary topic on those terms? -Rrius (talk) 04:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support, page views and common knowledge seem to support this as primary topic (it isn't expected to be "much more likely than all the others combined", just "more likely", which apparently it is). --Kotniski (talk) 11:04, 22 March 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Penrose. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:30, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Penrose. 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/20160318161841/http://www.johnpenrose.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=81 to http://www.johnpenrose.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=81

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) 07:01, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]