Talk:Lincoln

Why this redirects to Abraham Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln is by far the most hit page with Lincoln in the title. Here are the number of hits:

• Abraham Lincoln-688
• Lincoln, Lincolnshire-68
• Lincoln, Nebraska-54

Lincoln far outstrips them, and is thus the primary topic Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 00:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Could you provide a link to where you found those numbers? Either way (talk) 00:17, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

For reference, I oppose such a move. For the same reasons as given when this user kicked up a fuss on the same topic on enwiki, Abraham Lincoln is not an appropriate target for this redirect. Jenuk1985 (talk) 00:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

First off, Jeni, why are you not using your primary account? Is it to mask the fact that you continue your POV pushing against American articles and for English articles, as you do on EN wikipedia. Second of all, the redirect was that way for an entire month after I did this per WP:BOLD and nobody cared, indicating that they were perfectly fine with. Thirdly, here, there, anywhere, Abe Lincoln is clearly the primary topic...he has more than 10x the hits of any Lincoln article here. [1] for December 2009 Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 00:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Of the hits to all the Lincoln articles, what percentage of hits is the Abraham Lincoln article? Either way (talk) 00:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't own the user account Jeni on here ;-) so I have to stick with my original SUL of Jenuk1985. You didn't get your own way on enwiki so you had to come here to unleash your wrath. Jenuk1985 (talk) 00:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

• I think this is all a little absurd. I think asking for percentages in this case is just silly. I think it is quite obvious that an American President is going to generate more hits than a city. If there were another politician, say a Canadian Prime Minister named lincoln, then yes, look for percentages, but that isn't the case. This is an American President versus his wife, a musician, and a bunch of cities. I think it is clear what the main usage of the name is.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 00:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  • The American president isn't even called Lincoln, he is called Abraham Lincoln. At least most of the places on the disambig page are actually called Lincoln. This is a worldwide wiki, the world doesn't revolve around the USA. Jenuk1985 (talk) 00:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

No, it is not, however the President is still more notable and still a more common use than a city and an inn.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 00:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Significantly more notable than the city which gave him his name? Jenuk1985 (talk) 00:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Its also worth noting that the figures above are just page hits, they bear no resemblence on how a user got to the article. A significantly less number of people will have accessed Abraham Lincoln via the Lincoln page. The stats above are useless in this context.

For the record, Either, Lincoln accounts for 72.6% of all 10-15 blue-or-maroon-linked articles in the Lincoln disambiguation page. Clear primary topic, as Gordon says. Jeni's edits here are just plain POV pushing and disruption Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 00:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

At the same time though, Jenuk1985 does raise the valid point of what percentage of the people coming to "Lincoln" are looking for "Abraham Lincoln"? They're more than likely looking for one of the entries that starts with Lincoln like Lincoln, Nebraska. Yes, Abraham Lincoln gets more hits overall, but that does not necessarily mean he's the primary topic that is click on this page. Either way (talk) 00:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Now I could be the only one seeing this, but i have to agree with PBP89, you seem to express a strong anti-american pov in your comments, Jenuk1985. And I don't know about the rest of the word but Lincoln is often used as shorthand for Abe Lincoln in my area.--  † CR₉₀  00:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

a similar discussion on enwiki which may be of interest. Jenuk1985 (talk) 00:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

we are not enWP enWP discussions don't usually hold any water here.--  † CR₉₀  00:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Nonsense. They are clearly relevant. PeterSymonds (talk) 00:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm including it for reference for anyone that wishes to read it over, so we don't go around the same circles :) Jenuk1985 (talk) 00:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok then, knock yourself out, Peter.--  † CR₉₀  00:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Note I think its fair to let this discussion run for a few days to generate input from users in all timezones. I know some users around enwiki (not sure if its the case here or not) have a habit of jumping in and claiming consensus after a couple of hours. Lincoln is a worldwide topic and thus needs worldwide input. Jenuk1985 (talk) 00:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Lincoln should direct to a disambiguation page. Abraham Lincoln isn't the only person to have the name, not to mention all the different places that share the name. This is an international Wikipedia, not an American one. Lauryn^☆ 00:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Here's why the discussion is probably not relevant:

1. Were are not English Wikipedia; our hits and user preferences are different...Abraham Lincoln does not enjoy a 2.2:1 advantage over all other Lincoln articles combined
2. That was a month ago
3. That discussion was clouded by personal biases

Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 00:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Yet you fail to disclose the fact that you unsuccessfully led this campaign on the English Wikipedia. Your personal biases are just as prevalent in this discussion as others may be. Pots and kettles.

Furthermore, your arguments have nothing to do with the issue at hand. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Now I personally think Lincoln is better as a disambig, but if it has to redirect anywhere it should be to Abraham Lincoln, as that seems to the most popular usage.--  † CR₉₀  01:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

This was the disambiguation page until Purplebackpack89 moved it (twice) Jeni ^(talk) 01:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

• I said on IRC I wasn't going to comment again, but I lied. I really don't think it matters. A DAB page is the most convenient as it shows a reader all possible options. Use that. I honestly don't think it is something worth arguing about.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 01:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

 Comment: I have or the time being redirected Lincoln to Abraham Lincoln with a notice a the top of Abe's article while this discussion is happening. When consensus is reached it can be changed.--  † CR₉₀  01:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I know you guys seem to like disamb, but I firmly believe that anything that gets over 70% of the total hits of all articles containing that name is definetely a primary topic. The "this is an international wikipedia, not American" is really refuted by the whole number of hits. Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 17:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Its interesting that this user is attempting to do exactly the same thing on a couple of other projects, moving without discussion so that the Lincoln article can redirect to Abe. To think, I'm the one he insists is the POV pusher ;-) Jeni ^(talk) 22:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Should also be noted Jeni and her IP address have 3RRed on two different Wikipedias. They aren't English Wikipedia. Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 22:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

• This talk page is not the place to complain about each other, it is a place to discuss the Lincoln page. If you want to discuss the actions of another user, AN is your place. If the both of you would knock it off with all the POV accusations and discus in a somewhat civil manner, that would be most appreciated.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

• Purplebackpack89 had this same rant on the main English Wiki and now I find he is here up to his old tricks. I am sure now that he is a Troll and has no intentions of working with other Editors unless they agree with him. This is wasting Editors time and in non productive and i feel an Admin is going to have to do something. --BSTemple (talk) 19:35, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

And just for the record ... The Daily Telegraph used just Lincoln and guess what? No one thought that they meant Abe!!!Article HERE! --BSTemple (talk) 19:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Shame on you Temple. You probably don't even know what happened this day in 1809. FYI, Temple wanted Lincoln, England to be at the top, and unabashedly advocates for the supremacy of a medium-sized town in England. The Daily Telegraph has absolutely nothing to do with this. Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 20:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Once more you are twisting things and are becoming a serious nuisance who abuses any power or authority that is given to you, as you have with rollback. You really are a Troll aren’t you? The problem is your edits are disruptive. And your referring to Lincoln, which is a City, not a town (an example of your being petty and immature), is that I have always made the point that the very creation of the name Lincoln is from the City of Lincoln, which even gave rise to the county being called Lincolnshire. if there was no City called Lincoln then Abraham Lincoln would not have had his surname. Just look art the size of this Talk Page ... you are a Troll. --BSTemple (talk) 20:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

1)Most of the edits here weren't made by me; 2)A much better gauge of trolling is my contributions, which contain on the order of 100 new articles or links; 3) You never answered what today is Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 20:59, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

1809? Charles Darwin? I think it’s pretty obvious who you are infatuated with. I have told you before that it is better to work with other Editors and not keep trying to start this stupid campaign of yours which you have done on the English wiki. This is an encyclopaedia and as such is to assist people for whatever they are looking for … from around the world.--BSTemple (talk) 21:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Please drop this for a week whilst everyone takes a deep breath and calms down! It's not really a big deal after all and personal attacks are occurring. Thank you! fr33kman 22:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)