Talk:Kyle Harrison (baseball)

wp:lede

Answering the deleting editor's query, the lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. This overly brief lead, for a player who has won national and international junior titles, and set a minor league records not met since 1960, falls short of that. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:2859:A448:3B98:CBC7 (talk) 05:18, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the lede should be extended. With a longer lede, I would have considered B-class. Schwede66 19:03, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes the lead should be extended but certainly not with high school awards and stats that serve no long term notability.-- Yankees10 22:25, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

I still agree w/Schwede (I'm the same IP as above); I don't see the bare assertion that such national, and international, junior awards have no long term notability. --2603:7000:2101:AA00:589A:DCA8:1EE8:726A (talk) 19:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Linking Kyle Harrison (lacrosse)

🤔 @Yankees10 reverted my edited that linked Kyle Harrison (lacrosse) claiming that it was "unnecessary". How is this claim justified? My position is that since this page is disambiguated by (baseball) and the lacrosse player's page includes a link to the baseball player, it is sensible to link the lacrosse player's page in the same way on the baseball player's page for analogous disambiguation? Why the one-sided disambiguation by way of the baseball player? SmoovOpr8r (talk) 05:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

The relevant policy is WP:HATNOTE, which states:

"It is usually preferable not to have a hatnote when the name of the article is not ambiguous."

Because this article has been disambiguated by the "(baseball)" in the title, it isn't necessary -- no one looking for Kyle Harrison (lacrosse) will ever land on Kyle Harrison (baseball). One minor complicating factor is this part:

"When two articles share the same title, except that one is disambiguated and the other not, the undisambiguated article should include a hatnote with a link to the other article. It is not necessary to create a separate disambiguation page."

As the lacrosse player was located at Kyle Harrison (and at the time of writing, it is still a redirect to his article, not a fully-fledged disambiguation page), that page needed a hatnote to this one, but the reverse isn't true. I suppose the best option would be to determine a primary topic for which one should be located at Kyle Harrison, with a hatnote to the other on the resulting page, or else just turn into a DAB that links to both. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 23 September 2023

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. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 23:48, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

---

• Kyle Harrison (baseball) → Kyle Harrison
• Kyle Harrison → Deleted to make way for page move

– Primary topic. Per WP:PTOPIC. See, inter alia, pageviews. Pageviews show the baseball player to have been the primary topic over the past 12 months, which obviates any legitimate recency concerns. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:20F3:1000:9685:AD85 (talk) 15:53, 19 September 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). 2603:7000:2101:AA00:989F:BF6D:12F0:C613 (talk) 09:31, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Note: pages with content, such as Kyle Harrison, are ineligible to be proposed titles in move requests unless they, too, are formally dispositioned. "Kyle Harrison → Deleted to make way for page move" has been added to this request to meet that requirement. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 11:32, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

• Weak oppose, no doubt the baseball player will be primary but I think it's too soon due to long-term significance.--Ortizesp (talk) 04:57, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Too soon, as said above. If anything, the Hall of Famer is still the primary topic by long-term significance compared to the rookie. Hameltion (talk | contribs)

Why do you believe he has substantially greater enduring notability? My view is the opposite. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:A844:E9C8:4D63:D9CE (talk) 08:00, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

You're right that it's kind of unfair to compare them since the baseball player's career is just starting. If this very new pageview differential continues (for months? years?), the usage case may become irrefutable; it's just too early yet. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 01:00, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose summarising my point at Special:Permalink/1176679311: WP:RECENTISM may be applicable here given that the increase in traffic is recent. We can relook at this move sometime in the future (typically no early than 6 months for the continued coverage and sustained traffic to be apparent). – robertsky (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

• I think that there's a danger in focusing overly on a title for a rule (e.g., recentism here), without reflecting on the actual words of the rule. And the thinking behind it. The rule is not, as a glance at the title may suggest, "ignore pageview differentials that cover a year, if one article only has been created recently and thus has most of its pageviews recently." There is nothing to suggest that if coverage reflects a differential over an aggregate period of time -- such as a year -- that we should denigrate the differential in such cases. Rather, the rule in its closest particulars refers to "a sudden mass interest in any current event ... even if some readers later feel that the topic was not historically significant in any way.... a topic that might hardly be remembered a month later ..." I have not seen - and ask you to show me anywhere there is wp support for the view -- that we have to wait six more months, as you suggest. For "sustained coverage." I think "sustained coverage" is not a wp rule at all. Pageviews are -- and here the pageviews over the past year show the appropriate differential. I think its best if we stick to wp rules. Not individual editor views (mine included) as to what they should be. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:80A5:6DD:35CC:2BFA (talk) 07:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.