Talk:Smeagol (gastropod)

Gastropods High‑importance

	Gastropods portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gastropods, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of gastropods 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.GastropodsWikipedia:WikiProject GastropodsTemplate:WikiProject GastropodsGastropods articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taxonomy: For all marine species, Project Gastropods uses the taxonomy in the online database WoRMS. When starting a new article, do not use sources of taxonomic information that predate the 2017 revision for all gastropod groups ("Revised Classification, Nomenclator and Typification of Gastropod and Monoplacophoran Families" by Philippe Bouchet & Jean-Pierre Rocroi, Bernhard Hausdorf, Andrzej Kaim, Yasunori Kano, Alexander Nützel, Pavel Parkhaev, Michael Schrödl and Ellen E. Strong in Malacologia, 2017, 61(1–2): 1–526.) (can be dowloaded at Researchgate.net), substituting the previous classification of 2005 Taxonomy of the Gastropoda (Bouchet & Rocroi, 2005). If you need help with any aspect of an article, please leave a note at the Project talk page.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Requested move[edit]

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.

The result of the proposal was says he doesn't wants it my preciouses (per unanimous opposition).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smeagol (gastropod) → Smeagol —

move per Wikipedia:Article titles: "Article title should be" ... "consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources". There are no reliable sources that Smeagol is something else than gastropod.

The fictious "Sméagol" is already redirecting to its article "Gollum".
There exist only one word spelled "Smeagol" and it is the gastropod. --Snek01 (talk) 14:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The spelling Smeagol (without accent mark) also redirects to Gollum and after the release of the movie trilogy it is far more likely that searches for Smeagol (no accent) will be for the character rather then the obscure gastropod. --Kev min § 15:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this is a proposal to inconvenience readers looking for references to "Smeagol and Deagol" for the sake of those looking up the gastropod - which is named for the character; not a service to the encyclopedia. A type case of WP:PRIMARYUSAGE. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is indisputable here. Powers ^T 17:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. It's telling that the gastropod was actually named after the fictional character. PC78 (talk) 17:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We Opposes per WP:PRECIOUSTOPIC. --JaGa^talk 22:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- We loves it! Andrewa (talk) 02:39, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Agree that the character Gollum is the primary topic. It is possible for a derivative meaning such as the slug named after him to become the primary meaning in time, but this hasn't happened yet and probably won't. Andrewa (talk) 23:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose See wp:SNOW. Nom misses "Most generally" wrt reliable english language sources. This would be an obvious exception if there were no "reliable sources that Smeagol is something else (other than a) gastropod," but of course there are anyway. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:35, 14 September 2010 (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.