Jump to content

Talk:Trump

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Automatic redirect

[edit]

Nobody is looking for trump in card games lol.

Donald Trump has 84k views per day on average. Trump (card games) has 228 and before Trump's victory in 2016 it was 10...

Let's change it to an automatic redirect. SeeAlsoPolice (talk) 19:43, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One of you can start a requested move. I see no reason why the results would be any different then the requested move above. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 04:57, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 December 2022

[edit]
former 45 th president. 216.168.139.239 (talk) 18:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 20:12, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to handle the dictionary definition

[edit]

I was looking at potentially starting an RM here, but there's one factor that I don't know how to handle or really calculate – people searching for the definition of the word "trump". Wikinav indicates that about 89% of outgoing pageviews from the DAB page are to Donald Trump, which would normally be nearing the point where I think PT1 is overwhelming, but it also indicates that at least 2.5k (and from what I can gauge, probably 6.5k) people, out of the 18.7k who visited the dab page, never left it. That's a huge number, and I can only figure it's because of the fact that trump is a word that comes up in common parlance, and some number of those people probably exit for wiktionary, if they go anywhere (because I'm pretty sure Wikinav doesn't track clicks on the wiktionary link, though I'm not 100% certain on that).

Is there another explanation I'm completely missing for those people who enter the DAB page and never leave? I would say that they should be discarded when considering PTOPIC if not for the fact that the dictionary definition seems like a perfectly plausible candidate for why there's so many. Also, is the number actually 6.5k people, or 2.5k people? Because, that's a massive shift in the percentage that could shift my opinion on whether there's a PTOPIC here. And... how do we handle those people? Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but our readers heading here clearly think it is. Does NOTDIC mean that this shouldn't be factored into the RM, or should it be?

There's a fair amount of questions here, and I'm not sure where to start on answering them. Anyone else got ideas? Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:53, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Skarmory we see this relatively often, that some incoming traffic sees a disambiguation page and don't go for the top options, or any at all. It hasn't been easy to explain technically because e.g. I've never seen much explanation about how the clickstream software distinguishes user from bot etc. However, because we relatively often also see cases where there's e.g. ~1k incoming traffic and ~1k outgoing traffic to some very popular topic, I don't think we should be quick to discard this traffic entirely. A much more comprehensive analysis of even the existing data points, let alone adding more methods to figure out user intent, would be needed before we'd be really comfortable with our navigation. For example, I've been finding holes in our implementation of WP:NAMELIST over and over, and it seems like such an old and settled navigation guideline. Likewise with the primary topic guideline - I observed a lack of primary redirect at a name for almost a decade and barely any readers thought much of it (while editors eventually noticed and overwhelmingly approved a change). A lot of what we seem to think we have a full understanding of in our navigation is not necessarily so. --Joy (talk) 10:53, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 December 2023

[edit]
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: not moved. Per consensus. – robertsky (talk) 04:43, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump → Trump (disambiguation) – The name "Trump" is so associated with Donald Trump that it ought to redirect there, like it does for Biden, Obama, Reagan et al. Virtually all mentions of "Trump" refer to the man himself, and nothing else. TheCelebrinator (talk) 23:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong oppose. We've been through this song and dance many times before, and nothing's changed. The Donald is a likely topic for "Trump", but he can't be proven the long-term primary topic. O.N.R. (talk) 01:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree. As a reader I always expect typing "Trump" to direct me to Donald Trump's page (like Biden or Nixon). All the other items mentioned in the Trump disambiguation page aren't nearly as notable as Donald Trump, because Trump almost always refers to Donald Trump. Trump is gonna be a major historical figure as a U.S. president, so it's not like this is gonna change.72.16.69.192 (talk) 01:25, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it is still a common word in English, and a common term in cards, where the idiom comes from, which is still commonly used and unrelated to DJT -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 05:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. As mentioned at previous RMs, Donald Trump may be a primary topic for Trump according to the common usage criterion for WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but he isn't the sole winner by long-term significance. The card-games concept has been noteworthy for a lot longer than Donald, and will very likely remain so in the future too. We also typically put a higher bar on single-word surname redirects, which is why Clinton also doesn't redirect to the president. The terms Reagan, Biden etc don't have such a significant alternative meaning.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Trump indicates that in October '23, there were 8.8k incoming views of Trump, and we could identify 5.25k outgoing clickstreams to the proposed primary redirect target, which is already the #1 link in the list per MOS:DABCOMMON. This is a bit under 60%, and we can go into the clickstream archive and page view stats to find if this is a trend: in September there were 6k views of Donald Trump compared to 9.7k views of Trump (~62%), and in August the ratio was 10.8k to 18.7k (~58%). So it's consistently in the realm of being close to WP:PTOPIC requirements for usage, but when there's also 40% of other traffic to no less than 25 other destinations (October), it's not really hard to argue that readers generally recognize the ambiguity and wouldn't necessarily benefit much from short-circuiting. The conflicting bit of info is that a lot of the other destinations are also related to Donald Trump, so the ratio could go up if we decide to attribute those numbers as such. This could also indicate that we are lacking a broad-concept article that would explain generally what is meant by e.g. Trump (brand). If we take a longer view of statistics like this and enable logarithmic scale, there's a fair bit of correlation visible, indicating the average reader probably wouldn't be astonished with a primary redirect. --Joy (talk) 10:31, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Because nothing has changed since last time. A small percent of the people looking for Donald Trump's page come here first. This page loads fast, so they are just one quick click away from the desired page. If the move and redirect are approved, the thousand or so people who come here monthly looking for something else will have to wait for the very long page to load before they can see the link to this page if it is there, because it is not there now. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 05:47, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I think things have changed namely since last RM he's no longer president which means its less likely he's primary now than back in 2020. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose its unlikely Donald is primary for the single word today if he wasn't when he was president. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose no evidence provided that anything has changed since the last RM—blindlynx 21:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional weak support unless anyone has inquiries about my comment in the above section. (Please, I really want to pick anyone's brain on what might be happening to the missing outgoing pageviews...) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:24, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per all above. Parham wiki (talk) 15:09, 3 January 2024 (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.

Unprotect disambiguation

[edit]

It makes no sense for a disambiguation page to have a protection on it. May I request that it be unprotected? 76.64.181.63 (talk) 02:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can make a request at WP:RFUP. AntiDionysius (talk) 02:27, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No I can't. Even the "Request unprotect" page is protected. I can't make requests unless I have an account 76.64.181.63 (talk) 02:35, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So it is AntiDionysius (talk) 02:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure whar you mean by that? 76.64.181.63 (talk) 02:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I was just noting that you were correct. AntiDionysius (talk) 02:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid this is kind of above my pay grade now; I'm not an admin and therefore can't help on this one. If you feel strongly about this you may just need to create an account. AntiDionysius (talk) 02:43, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Protection applied in 2017 following extensive vandalism from both supporters and opponents of the US political figure. Am reluctant to lift the protection at this stage of the US political cycle as it seems very likely the vandalism will recur. What changes do you have in mind, that would need the page unprotected? -- Euryalus (talk) 05:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think they mean the disambiguation page, not the page on Trump himself. 70.50.199.125 (talk) 05:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can request a page be unprotected with or without an account, you just can't edit a protected page without an account. ButterCashier (talk) 12:06, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Trump&oldid=1260497591"