Talk:John Miller (Medal of Honor, 1865)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John Miller (Medal of Honor, 1865) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of John Miller (Medal of Honor, 1865) be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other websites. |
 | On 14 January 2025, it was proposed that this article be moved from John Miller (1865 Medal of Honor recipient) to John Miller (Medal of Honor, 1865). The result of the discussion was moved. |
Requested move 14 January 2025
- 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. Per consensus, for consistency, to move the alternate proposed title. With respect to whether the disambiguator is the right one, as noted by participants that it would probably be the best for a wider discussion to happen as it would impact on many other articles than just these two. – robertsky (talk) 11:57, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- John Miller (1865 Medal of Honor recipient) → John Miller (1865 Medal of Honor)
- Jim (Medal of Honor recipient) → Jim (Medal of Honor)
– Wikipedia has 409 articles that use "Medal of Honor" but only these two that use "Medal of Honor recipient". Consistency seems desirable. One of these was moved in the opposite direction 14 years ago. I note that "Jim" seems rather ambiguous; that one should be something different if we want to fix that issue. — BarrelProof (talk) 14:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support per WP:CONCISE and in the interest of consistency. Liu1126 (talk) 18:04, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I think all the others should be moved to "Medal of Honor recipient". IMO the disambiguator must be either a gloss for the subject (e.g. John B. Little (mathematician)) or an abstract noun representing the general field of study (e.g. Ring (mathematics)). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:52, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- I might tend to agree with that, but I don't know whether your description of what serves as an appropriate disambiguator is well accepted or not. I guess "(baseball)" is a "general field" – I've noticed that and similar usage like "(football)" relatively often (see WP:NCSPDAB). I would be fine with adding "recipient" to the others, and might actually prefer that, but I assumed that was unlikely to be accepted in this case since "(Medal of Honor)" is currenly used more than 200 times as much as "(Medal of Honor recipient)". — BarrelProof (talk) 02:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Standard disambiguation. Although it should be John Miller (Medal of Honor, 1865) per standard. And probably Jim (Medal of Honor, 1873) for avoidance of ambiguity (can't believe he's the only person known as Jim who's received the MOH). -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- I support Necrothesp's refinement suggestions. — BarrelProof (talk) 15:11, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support per WP:CONSISTENT and WP:CONCISE. The wide use of "(Medal of Honor)" as shows a wider consensus that we shouldn't break from without a big requested move or RfC, even if I agree that "(Medal of Honor recipient)" is more natural. — Wug·a·po·des 01:51, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. John Miller is not a medal of honor, that's just ungrammatical. The present disambiguator is the correct one, and it's surprising to see experienced editors arguing otherwise. If other titles are wrong, fix those rather than trying to make even more titles wrong. — Amakuru (talk) 13:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- And John Miller (basketball) is not a basketball! Would you like to move on those thousands of sports articles too? Usually I would agree with you, but when we have numerous articles that use a particular disambiguator it's better for reasons of consistency to stick to it. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Amakuru. For this article, John Miller (soldier) is nicely vacant. Cremastra (talk) 21:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you look at John Miller#Military I'm sure you'll be able to see why that won't work! -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support: Category:American Civil War recipients of the Medal of Honor shows us that John Miller (Medal of Honor, 1865) is the ideal move target, based on most common practice on similar DAs. I could live with John Miller (Medal of Honor) as requested. Using (soldier) as a disambiguation in this particular case is a poor choice (given the large number of potential claimants for "primary" topic spot) as User:Necrothesp makes obvious. BusterD (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- John Miller (Medal of Honor) is not feasible either, as we also have John G. Miller (Medal of Honor). -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support with Necrothesp's caveats. In a 409–2 situation where only the two are at issue, the consistency argument wins. If someone wants to start a mass RM going in the other direction, I guess I'd be open to that, although it's probably best left as water under the bridge. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:13, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
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.