Talk:Chris Johnson (safety, born 1971)

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

Requested move 6 April 2015[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved as proposed. There is consensus for a move, and "American football" is not sufficient as a disambiguator because in addition to the two safeties, there is also Chris Johnson (cornerback), and Chris Johnson (running back). (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 09:09, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]



Chris Johnson (safety)Chris Johnson (safety, born 1971)Chris T. Johnson was a safety Joeykai (talk) 22:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
  • Oppose — No need for a unnecessary distribution. Christ T. Johnson has a middle initial which tells that its a different person than Chris Johnson (safety). CookieMonster755 (talk) 02:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support WP:PRECISE the current title is insufficiently disambiguous to identify the topic of this article, as the other person is also "Chris Johnson". This article is not sufficiently disambiguated as it can refer to both persons. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 03:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment "Chris T. Johnson" is also insufficiently disambiguous to identify that person, as the person in this article is also a "T." -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 03:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Chris Johnson (American footballer, born 1971) what is a "safety"? In ictu oculi (talk) 19:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Unless this article improves substantially, I don't see a need to rename this article, which is a stub. --George Ho (talk) 10:14, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Being a stub would suggest it is even more important to make sure it is not ambiguously named -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 11:26, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.