Talk:Štěpánov

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: moved. (non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 19:18, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Štěpánov (Olomouc District) → Štěpánov
• Štěpánov → Štěpánov (disambiguation)

– Clearly WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It is a town, and it is the only municipality with this name (three other has only similar names). FromCzech (talk) 14:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Ortizesp (talk) 04:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

cs:Štěpánov shows a much larger list of locations with this name. Is this one really the most likely to be searched for by readers? https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=%C5%A0t%C4%9Bp%C3%A1nov doesn't show anything, so it looks like this doesn't get any appreciable amount of traffic? --Joy (talk) 13:57, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/massviews/?platform=all-access&agent=user&source=wikilinks&range=latest-90&sort=views&direction=1&view=list&target=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0t%C4%9Bp%C3%A1nov doesn't really indicate primary topic status. --Joy (talk) 13:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Compare Štěpánov with Trhový Štěpánov is like compare Orleans and New Orleans. Trhový is an integral part of the name, there is only one town named Štěpánov. FromCzech (talk) 14:27, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. As for the other places listed on the cs.wiki dab page, those are just parts of municipalities, they wouldn't be the primary topic over a small town. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 14:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The question is whether the small town is the primary topic over the sum of all other eponymous places. --Joy (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that can also be fine if the one mononymously known as the term isn't satisfying WP:PTOPIC, because WP:PTM says: Placenames are often divided between a specific and generic part, for example North Carolina (where "Carolina" is the specific, and "North" the generic part). Common generics are compass points, upper/lower, old/new, big/small, etc. It is entirely proper to include such placenames in disambiguation pages with the specific title (North Carolina is properly listed at Carolina (disambiguation)). --Joy (talk) 17:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]