Jump to content

Talk:BP (disambiguation)

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

Berlin Philharmoniker?

[edit]

Berlin Philharmoniker?--达伟 (talk) 09:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 11 January 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 section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Opposition based on Primary Topic is strong - clearly no consensus to move. (non-admin closure) В²C 17:44, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


– BP links directly to the article on British Petroleum, but BP is also used in science - Geology, Evolution, .. - to indicate "Before Present"; so when someone inserts a BP link, shouldn't it be triggered that the author makes a choice to which BP ? Thy SvenAERTS (talk) 14:22, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:44, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PTOPIC says that it has to be "more likely than all the other topics combined". That pageviews link only compares BP (41,012) against Before Present (596). That's enough to raise one's blood pressure (55,885) or, as Baden-Powell (15,183) might say, "Go at it!": but where to go? The Solomon Islands (32,609) or Bletchley Park (15,555)?
Fortunately, of course, we don't just consider pageviews. 89.147.70.233 (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do you really think people looking for blood pressure will type in BP? Calidum 21:29, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And in particular do you think people looking for Bletchley Park will type "BP"? I can't imagine myself doing so, although it may have been more commonly known by that when it was first publicized. My oppose is still weak since Google also does give some results for blood pressure but I don't think I've ever heard if it being referred to like that. Also if this is done the company will need to be moved, maybe BP p.l.c. or BP (company) (I have changed this to a multi-move). Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:39, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since BP (disambiguation) gets about a twentieth of the the hits that BP does, I should say that people don't expect to find Bletchley Park, blood pressure etc at "BP". Less certain are some of the redirects: B. P. and B-P redirect to Robert Baden-Powell, B.P. and Bp. to BP (disambiguation), yet Bp, B P and B.p. redirect to BP - who ever refers to the company that way? 89.147.70.233 (talk) 06:01, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but move the article to BP (company) - "BP p.l.c." is a very unnatural way to title an article. I have an extremely high threshold to allow any topic to be primary when it comes to two- and three-letter acronyms, because I feel we serve readers and editors much more by leaving disambiguation pages at those. The BP (oil company) article is not "more likely than all the other topics combined" to be WP:PRIMARY over so many other uses for the usage or abbreviation "BP". -- Netoholic @ 23:25, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – no primarytopic. Most people in the world don't know BP the company even if they buy their gas. Move BP to BP (company) as Netoholic suggests. Dicklyon (talk) 00:56, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
BP (company) falls under WP:PDAB, though, as Boston Pizza is also a company known as "BP". 89.147.70.233 (talk) 07:39, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SvenAERTS:: "Shouldn't it be triggered that the author makes a choice to which BP ?" — the editor should check the link, per WP:TESTLINK. 89.147.70.233 (talk) 06:53, 12 January 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.