Talk:Marta (footballer)

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.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:35, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Marta Vieira da Silva → Marta
• Marta → Marta (disambiguation)

– As a Brazilian soccer player, Marta is known almost exclusively by her first name only. Of the items on the disambiguation page, only a few are known as just "Marta"; of that subset, the soccer player gets about 30 times more pageviews than the next-most-popular page. See stats for last December (away from the soccer season to avoid bias): soccer player, river, given name, Marta, Nepal, Marta, Lazio. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority comes closer at about 2/3 of the pageviews (decreasing to 1/2 in August 2011 due to the soccer season), but it's technically "MARTA", not "Marta" and I don't think it should stand in the way of the soccer player being primary. (If necessary, MARTA can be called out in a hatnote.) Powers ^T 11:50, 2 September 2011 (UTC) Powers ^T 11:50, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. I can see absolutely no need for this move. The current article name is correct and even more exact than the suggested version and fact that many readers might search under Marta first can be handled via redirects.--Kmhkmh (talk) 12:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is in direct opposition to WP:COMMONNAME. Barack Hussein Obama II is correct and more exact than Barack Obama but we don't use it as the article title. Mary Abigail Wambach is correct and more exact than Abby Wambach but we don't use it as the article title. 95% of this article's readers probably had no idea what Marta's family name is before reading the article. Powers ^T 12:50, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see no explicit contradiction to WP:COMMONNAME, since there we have a common option ("not necessarily") and no disambiguation case. Moreover redirecting the exact name to the more common name makes little sense to me (Wambach example). True, we could have the article under Marta (there is no dispute regarding that anyhow), but the question is whether we would need to and hence whether there is requirement to move them around at a later stage. All in all I still see no convincing reason for moving the articles around. Currently the article's name is correct and can easily be found.--Kmhkmh (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not sure why you say "redirecting the exact name to the more common name makes little sense", since we do it all the time. I already gave you two examples, not to mention the several that are in WP:COMMONNAME and countless others I could name. Powers ^T 14:23, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Not everything "we do" does necessarily make much sense. There is certainly no harm in redirecting the exact name to the common name, but the idea behind the redirects is redirect alternative search terms people might use to the correct article. From that perspective the scenario that somebody searches for Abby Wambach under her exact full name rather than Abby Wambach is a bit outlandish. Assuming that essentially nobody would do that, there's strictly speaking no need for such a redirect in the first place (though it doesn't harm). Also I'm not arguing that your examples need to be changed, they are fine as they are and I'm not not this article could not be under Marta (but historically it was created under a different name). I'm arguing, tha I see no real need change the current situation (it is correct and it works) and personally dislike to (potentially constantly) move around stuff for rather formalistic reasons alone.--Kmhkmh (talk) 14:37, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, there are other people named Marta at Marta (given name) who must also be considered. Even if this footballer is known primarily as simply "Marta", it would probably be better to move her to "Marta (football player)", but that's a completely different discussion. Marta is too common a name to give to any one person. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:49, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, but people who just happen to have the first name "Marta" generally won't be sought under just that name, because that's not how names work. Brazilian soccer players, on the other hand, are sought under just their first names. See, for instance, Ronaldo, or Pelé. Powers ^T 17:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Marta is a common name. Like Victoria and other common given names, it should be a disambiguation page. Rennell435 (talk) 17:24, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't quite see the analogy. Are there individuals who are nearly universally known as just "Victoria"? Powers ^T 17:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The queen... If you want an American analogy, see Madonna. Rennell435 (talk) 18:28, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • The queen is "Queen Victoria", rarely just "Victoria", if ever. Madonna is a disambiguation page because there are two equally prominent usages. No such case exists for "Marta". Powers ^T 19:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • And note that even then, it's Madonna (entertainer), not Madonna Louise Ciccone. Powers ^T 19:08, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Per Pelé, Ronaldo etc. Clavdia chauchat (talk) 18:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Look, folks; every reliable source calls her just "Marta". I found an article that actually used her full name, and even that soon switched to just "Marta". Here is the official FIFA Women's World Cup roster for Brazil: just "Marta". Here is the WNY Flash roster: just "Marta". Here's ESPN: just "Marta". It's as close to universal as it gets. We look ridiculous for titling the article with her full name. Powers ^T 13:53, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, we don't. In fact it doesn't matter little under which exact word the article is under as long as it is correct and can easily be found under Marta as well, which is the case. Also we're an encyclopedia not a news medium, which in doubt follow different criteria for naming things. In particular since we have a disambiguation page already using her full name is good choice. By the way most Interwikis handle it in a similar manner. I really see no problem with the current version whatsoever.--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh come on, most of them just copied us. Her native-language WP uses what would be Marta (footballer) for us, which would at least be better than the current title. Powers ^T 18:10, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • They just copied according to who? And what exactly is your problem with her full name?--Kmhkmh (talk) 18:19, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Because it doesn't mesh with our usual naming policies, as illustrated by the titles of articles like Abby Wambach and Ronaldo. Powers ^T 18:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Actually it does mesh quite fine with the usual naming of our soccer players. Most soccer players have articles under their full names, even Wambach has that with the exception that here middle name is not stated, but she's neither under Abby nor Wambach. And Ronaldo is actually even a bad example because there are 2 famous soccer players under that name.--Kmhkmh (talk) 04:21, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • You completely and totally missed my point. The point is that we title articles as the players are best known, not according to their legal full names. Wambach is not under "Abby" or "Wambach" because she's referred to by both names in a professional context. Ronaldo is under "Ronaldo" because -- even with other people named Ronaldo in soccer -- he is by far the most famous person to go by just that one name in a professional context. Marta is exactly the same -- she is by far the most famous person to go by just "Marta" professionally. Any attempt to get Ronaldo moved to Ronaldo Luís Nazário de Lima wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding; why should Marta be treated any differently? Powers ^T 12:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • I understood your point the first time around, the problem is that I don't find it convincing. We can have players under their most known name, in particular if there's no disambiguation conflict. But that doesn't mean we have to under all circumstances in particular if there's a disambiguation conflict anyway. You also need to think in different time frames WP is not just written for the current year and what might be searched most in that one. The Brazilian Ronaldo is currently somewhat better known as the Portuguese one but by far is probably already a stretch. In particular since the Brazilian is not active anymore and Portuguese one is one of of the best known active players. Who knows what will be the case in 5 or 10 years. Having said that nobody has suggested to move Ronaldo, but I hardly consider him as a "good example". It rather exemplifies potential problems. Anyhow getting back to my original point, which simply is, that it works fine as it currently is as far as Marta is concerned. We neither look ridiculous nor do we differ from the article naming of most soccer players - period! It is merely true that we potentially could have a different naming scheme for Marta, but again I see no real need to change the current.--Kmhkmh (talk) 13:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Per common name. But article is easily found with the disambiguation, so i don't really care. -Koppapa (talk) 12:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I'm not in favour of the move to 'Marta' because of the many other instances of the name, even though singularly none of them are as popular. However, I do think the name of this page could be improved on the basis of what she is normally referred to as, and would therefore propose Marta (footballer). Eldumpo (talk) 14:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to have a consistent guideline for all Brazilian footballers and their "artist" names. At Category:Brazilian female footballers, it looks about 50:50 for nicknames against full names in the titles. Clavdia chauchat (talk) 14:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I somewhat doubt that. To me that looks like a case of WP:CREEP and is likely to turn into a "religious war" over the "true naming" convention. All we really need is a correct name (full name or common name) and ensuring that the article can easily be found (use redirect or disambiguation pages as needed). In short leave the decision to the original author of the article and potentially move it later if a clear need (disambiguation) or clear undisputed majority arises for a move arises. In general I'd recommend not to needlessly tinker with things that essentially work and avoid overregulation.--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:37, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, this is not the name under which people who want to read about this person would expect to find her. Our article naming guidelines ask for recognizability (which the current name fails horribly) and conciseness (which the current name also fails); the only one of those five criteria that the current title satisfies is precision. (Consistency and naturalness can be argued, though I feel that the shorter title satisfies them better.) Powers ^T 16:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I want to support this, on the basis that we probably would do this for a man. However, I am unsure about moving Marta to Marta (disambiguation). If that page stays where it is, the current title is probably better than Marta (footballer) —WFC— 15:30, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What exactly did the creation of Marta (footballer) achieve? Nobody is searching under that name and now in case a different naming scheme would be implemented this redirect blocks the moving of Marta.--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• As far as moving this article is concerned, creating the redirect does not in any way prejudice or prevent a move to that location. —WFC— 16:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It surely does technically speaking, because it requires an administrator to delete the redirect in order to move the article, otherwise an ordinary editor could have moved the article. It's not a big deal, but still I see no reason for creating that redirect in the first place. All it does from my perspective is creating this minor annoyance in the case Marta article gets moved indeed.--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • As it is a redirect to this article with no other history, there is no technical impediment to the move at this time. Powers ^T 17:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • The history doesn't matter, you cannot move an article to an existing name, to move it you need to delete the existing name first. That is a technical issue and has nothing to do with a WP-regulations or practices (think of it as of moving/copying a file on your harddisk, the destination name cannot be in use).--Kmhkmh (talk) 18:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Powers is correct. See [1] and [2] (the original location was Box4). Even non-admins will be able to move this article if there is consensus to do so. —WFC— 21:56, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Interesting, it seems I stand corrected here. Though this is rather confusing since it is handled differently in other language WPs. In de.wp the very same thing does not work (just tested it to be sure), but apparently I was wrong assuming that it "naturally" would be the same in en.wp.--Kmhkmh (talk) 23:21, 6 September 2011 (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.

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: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:51, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marta Vieira da Silva → Marta (footballer) – Well if the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC argument didn't fly, surely WP:COMMONNAME suggests that this is at least a better title than the current one? Powers ^T 11:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• weak Oppose. Though such a move is possible (i.e. there is no real problem with it), it is neither needed nor required by WP:COMMONNAME in this context (as explained in the discussion above).--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there's no problem with it, why bother to oppose? Powers ^T 23:04, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • You can see it as (very) weak oppose, I just dislike the moving of stuff when it is not really needed.--Kmhkmh (talk) 23:54, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. The clear common name. Jenks24 (talk) 15:31, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. As interim measure. Frankly I find the failure of the first proposal incredible! In the long term I don't think the presence of a Nepalese village and an Italian river, with due respect to them, should stop Marta being the primary topic at Marta. Clavdia chauchat (talk) 17:31, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support per User:Kmhkmh. Whilst I would have searched first for Marta (because I'm too lazy to type more than that) and then Marta (footballer), either of those would easily have found me the article - the first via the DAB, the second via the existing redirect - but I could also have simply used her full name had I known it or come across it in a news item about her. I don't care that much where a page is as long as it is easy to find and I'm not a fan of just moving stuff "because" when there are many other useful things to do. Please leave a redirect... --ClubOranje^T 08:20, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, "easy to find" is part of my concern. Since Marta's family name is so rarely used, it's unfamiliar to most readers. True, she's the only footballer listed on the Marta disambiguation page, but it still leaves the reader wondering if they have the right article until they click through and see for sure. Powers ^T 12:36, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as the common name. Eldumpo (talk) 19:12, 16 September 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.