Talk:Darwin

message: I think darwin should redirect to THE GREATEST SCIENTIST OF ALL TIME DUH!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.219.35.132 (talk) 11:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it should remain as it is, redirecting to Darwin (disambiguation). Tony Sidaway and I figured this to be a reasonable compromise. Darwin, Northern Territory should never have been moved to Darwin, but it is finally appropriately named. And while "Darwin" will always most likely refer to something associated with Charles Darwin, he is not always likely to be the topic of choice. "Darwin", unqualified, will always (though not exlusively) refer to the city. Having Darwin redirect to Darwin (disambiguation) is no impediment to a user searching for either topic, and should be preferred to "primary topic disambig" in this case because, I think, there is not one.--Cyberjunkie 04:12, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: What I meant was, Darwin (city) is not said with any qualification. People simply don't state *City* and then *Polity* in common-speech and rarely do formally. This is not to say, however, that "Darwin" by itself exclusively refers to the city - it doesn't. But because there is no exclusivity is precisely why Darwin should redirect as presently.--Cyberjunkie 06:02, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Users searching for a particular person are likely to give first and last names, as disambig pages for last name only are typically patchy (even this one doesn't contain all the people in Wikipedia with the surname Darwin). Disambig pages for places are usually much more complete, as are pages for 'firstname lastname', as somebody has probably tried to resolve all links to it at least once. As such, Darwin should be (or redirect to) the disambig page. --Scott Davis Talk 23:46, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

text: My preference is keeping this as a redirect to the disambiguation page: after all, people may come here looking for the famous naturalist who pioneered ideas about evolution, Erasmus Darwin :) ..dave souza, talk 19:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

text: It's because the original English-speakers have evolved into lesser beings  over time. 80.47.219.117 12:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just because the chap has so many things named after him, and we can't expect everyone living in Darwin or standing atop a Mount Darwin or swimming in the Darwin Sound etc. to know where to look. And of course there are all those other famous Darwins. This disambig is a good option. .. dave souza, talk 13:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect to [[Charles Darwin]]

message: According to Websters renown is defined as "state of being widely acclaimed and highly honored". Is it appropriate to refer to a man who is looked upon by many as a lier because of his unproven theory appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjb891 (talk • contribs) 
:"Widely" means there are a number of exceptions, which caters for those poor deluded souls  ;) .. dave souza, talk 13:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renowned 

message: The OS should be removed from the primary choices right at the top- It's not as notable as Charles Darwin or the Australian city and is already listed below. I'm going to remove it. 90.242.66.1 (talk) 10:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operating System 

message: :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. WP:SNOW closure.   -- Calidum 02:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly what I'm saying? A number of !votes from the 2009 discussion suggested that Darwin, NT was the more likely primary topic, not Charles Darwin (as the proposer suggested). ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 07:16, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: *Support as nominated. the northern territory's city is clearly Primary Topic. "Darwin" without disambiguation of it would be known more about the Australian city, not Charles Darwin. Even Charles Darwin is still known as Darwin does not strengthen the evidence that Darwin in first of mind is actually a Australian city. Many people around the world aside from historian more likely refer Darwin as an Australian city. 180.249.244.242 (talk) 08:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That might be that the city is potentially a more likely target for "Darwin" alone but doesn't mean it is primary. Charles (who is well known globally) has considerable long-term significance and its reasonable to think he would sometimes be searched this way. Crouch, Swale (talk)  18:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 15 September 2020 

message: English 2A03:2880:21FF:1:0:0:FACE:B00C (talk) 12:54, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Life Sciences