Talk:Thomas Smythe

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thomas Smythe article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

slave trade[edit]

I came across this page yesterday and edited it a bit for organization and style today. I don't have time to work on it more, particularly to re secondary sources on indentured people coming to America under the headright system. I also noticed that most of the sources appear primary and nothing mentions his involvement in the trans Atlantic slave trade, which began with the Virginia colony under his watch and was a primary means of developing the Bahamas.Jweaver28 (talk) 17:46, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Major copy edit[edit]

I am working on this article. It doesn't need to be rewritten, just edited in places. The pronoun "he" as used here is sometimes confusing-- trying to figure out to which man it refers. I have also removed details that aren't really necessary and added links to words our readers may not know. I added the date Elizabeth I died and the name of the Tsar (Boris Gudinov) when Smythe was ambassador to Russia. Please respond here if you have any questions or suggestions. Thank you. Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 21:37, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 June 2019[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 the page views cited and the significance noted by Amakuru. -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:05, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

– Per the page view comparison, there is no clear primary topic, especially between the subject currently sitting at the ambiguous title and Thomas Smythe (customer). Steel1943 (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about your conclusion regarding the page views. Granted, 23 views per day isn't exactly heavy traffic, but it's still around 75% of the total share. PC78 (talk) 20:15, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- A primary topic is traditionally required to have at least 10 times the amount of page views of all other subjects; this one doesn't even come close. And in the 90 day page view comparison, Thomas Smythe (customer) has more views that the default primary topic some days. Steel1943 (talk) 01:33, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ten times? I don't believe that's a requirement of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, which merely states "much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined". PC78 (talk) 07:19, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - It's not specifically worded in there, but I've heard it multiple times from other editors to a point where I adopted it myself. The point behind it is at 10 times the total of the rest of the views, a subject is almost for certain the primary topic due to so few readers going to other topics in comparison to that one. At a 3/1 ratio, readers as a whole are usually still not sure which topic they are trying to locate. (In addition, for the current de facto primary topic in this discussion, the 3/1 ratio isn't even consistent all days with some days the ratio being closer to 1/1 and Thomas Smythe (customer) even scoring more views than Thomas Smythe some days.) Steel1943 (talk) 12:46, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. The late 16th century–early 17th century merchant/politician/colonial administrator is a minor historical figure whose position in the memory of posterity is insufficiently notable to warrant WP:PRIMARYTOPIC elevation. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:56, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - firstly, there's no rule like "ten times" the page views, and never has been. Each case is considered on its merits. This Thomas Smythe not only has more page views than all the others combined, but a cursory Google search and comparison of roles suggests he was the long-term significance leader as well. No need to change anything here. — Amakuru (talk) 12:30, 18 June 2019 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.