Talk:Julius

message: There are hundreds of people on Wikipedia with given name Julius. They can't all be listed here, so I propose either removing the given name listing altogether, or a limited list of notable Juliuses, including the saint, the popes, Julius Nyerere, etc. But the selection might be difficult and contentious!  Stanning (talk) 09:27, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Given name? 

message: I'm not sure that Julius wouldn't be more useful as the dab; it currently redirects to Julia (gens). The Latin form of the gens name Iulius should and does redirect to Julia (gens), though. Cynwolfe (talk) 01:02, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Juius as redirect 

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: moved. per consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) echidnaLives - talk - edits 06:39, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Julius (disambiguation) →  – "Julius" currently redirects to Julia gens, but that is only one of several meanings for this search term.
The nomen was certainly significant in Roman times, with Julius Caesar the single most well-known holder, but most other Romans known as Julius either weren't nearly as well-known, or they were well-known people but only happened to have Julius as one of their names and not one that was used to actually commonly refer to them.
Since then, "Julius" has also been applied as a given name outside of the Roman concept and there is a large amount of holders across large spans of time, the general level of significance and page views of which matches that of the Romans. In addition, the term has also been used in other contexts, not specifically based on Roman nomen, which further dilute the reasoning for redirecting to the latter as a primary topic.
We should stop short-circuiting navigation and instead disambiguate this term at "Julius". This will also allow us to see the WikiNav data for this specific term, and then we can reconsider this in a few months time, too.
Over the last month we discussed this at Talk:Julius (name)#Requested move 17 November 2022 and there's a lot of statistical links and other info in there. I'd just like to add that neither Julia nor Julian are redirected to Julia gens. TIA. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:59, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @P Aculeius I don't quite understand what you're saying there. What is "here", "Julius (disambiguation)" or? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:30, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "here" is the place where the discussion is occurring.  P Aculeius (talk) 15:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: So you wouldn't mind redirecting Julius to Julius (disambiguation)? That is certainly an option, but an option precluded by Wikipedia:Article titles#Parenthetical disambiguation clearly saying that this technique is only used as a last resort. You can see that with e.g. John, Peter, Dave and any number of other disambiguation pages which sit at the base name. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:47, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not the proposal under discussion—I don't understand why, for the second time, you're changing the thing that was actually proposed into something else that you want to do instead.  This title... just to be clear, "this" refers to the present article, where this discussion, meaning the one we're currently having, about this proposal, the one in which we are currently typing... is about whether to move this page to a more ambiguous title, instead of one that tells people exactly what it's for.  That is what I am opposing in this discussion.  Keep it where it is.  If other stuff needs to be moved here—i.e. the contents of other articles—that's an entirely separate issue, and one that really doesn't need to be discussed on the talk page unless it becomes contentious.  P Aculeius (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me assure you that I'm just as confused. The policies and guidelines of the English Wikipedia dictate how navigation is implemented. The way "Julius" points to "Julia gens" right now is allowed under what is described at WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. I am saying that this was inaccurately applied, that the primary meaning of "Julius" is not "Julia gens", hence the redirect is not optimal. Instead, it should be disambiguated. We can technically do that by changing it to point to "Julius (disambiguation)" immediately, but the moment we do that, someone will apply the aforementioned section of the article title policy, and squash the two into just "Julius". And then people will rightly say that this was improper because it was done without discussion. That's why I'm using the RM process to make sure the same thing is discussed first. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 18 December 2022 

message: In https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Julius for February '23 we see 538 incoming views of which 178 went to the name, 60 to the nomen, 33 to Caesar, and 11 to JC disambiguation in turn. There actually isn't a direct link to Caesar, we should add it, as right now it seems people are mostly typing it in manually? Other than that this seems as expected. --Joy (talk) 07:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: In April '23 it was 645 incoming, and outgoing 222 name, 56 Caesar, 29 nomen. --Joy (talk) 18:32, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

text: In May '23 it was 871 incoming, outgoing 216 name, 65 Caesar, 29 nomen. --Joy (talk) 17:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

text: In July '23 it was 891 incoming, outgoing 280 name, 61 Caesar, 33 nomen. This seems pretty stable now, Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation/Archive 55#effects of WP:NAMELIST on navigation outcomes for anthroponymy entries notwithstanding. --Joy (talk) 13:36, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  followup to move