Talk:AOC (disambiguation)

message: Is Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain really referred to as "AOC"? If so, the article about him does not mention it. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: A quick Google search suggests he is. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 05:09, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: If the abbreviation is 'notable', then the article should mention it. Google searches bring up meaningless abbreviations all the time. Leschnei (talk) 15:19, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that we're talking about 22,000 Google search results, if you feel it ought to be in the article as well as here, that would seem to be a case of . 142.160.89.97 (talk) 00:31, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain 

message: Regarding your recent reversion with the edit summary "Self-contradicting", I'm wondering what you mean by that. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 05:09, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversion

message: Aren't the topics in this list supposed to actually use the acronym AOC to refer to them? Almost all of the topics, other than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, merely have initials of AOC without any reciprocal use of those initials as part of an acronym. Why is that? Stevenmitchell (talk) 00:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It feels like some may have been added to try and muddy the waters on other uses for AOC even being actual uses. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:34, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Locke Cole You may be right about that... Stevenmitchell (talk) 21:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Aren't There Any Legitimate Acronyms Here? 

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 as proposed. Lots of good discussion here. The deciding factor is that the supporters cited clear statistical evidence of primacy via pageviews, and no compelling argument was made whatsoever about long-term significance (though it should be noted that a couple assertions to long-term significance were made). Our policy at WP:D makes pretty clear that the mere existence of other things that could perhaps be referred to by the title, or even that legitimately are referred to by the title, is not enough. Assertions of U.S.-centrism were also handily shot down by actual data, which wasn't responded to.
A couple of opposing editors suggested that WP:PRIMARYTOPIC be changed to be against moves like this, which implicitly concedes that our policies are in fact currently in favor of it. While of course policies can be changed, the very reason for their existence is so that a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS doesn't override what Wikipedians as a whole have agreed to do. If you disagree with the decision to move, WT:D might be the appropriate place to complain. We're supposed to follow policies, not local consensus, and the policy-based consensus here is that 90% pageviews is enough to grant primary topic for this TLA.   Red Slash 23:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: AOC →  – Many years later, and it's pretty clear that  is the primary topic for "AOC". Proof (turn on "Logarithmic scale" to see it more clearly) Note the spikes in AOC daily page views that correspond to spikes in views on the actual Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez article. Searching published works also bears this out.
*Support as proposer. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:34, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: *You make a good case, and it is her common name, so I'll change to support. Looks like AOC International picks up about half of the remaining clicks, so should probably be included in a hatnote if moved. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:32, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

text: *The U.S. congresswoman's page does get over 90% of the bounces from this disamb., and has so consistently for over four years. Many of the last RM's opposers cited 'recentism' as a main reason, but it would seem that the past and continuing consistency would remove that objection. She's commonly known as AOC, and that's what many or most readers will be searching for when looking for her page, which is why the disamb. receives 90%plus of outgoing links going to her article. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You will note I said there is no primary topic, not that any other topic is primary topic. I merely used the highly significant term from British and Commonwealth military history as an example. This is not American Wikipedia. Most of us outside America (and, I will take a stab, even many people in America) have never heard of this woman and would not expect an abbreviation to point to her article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:18, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Pertaining to the letters AOC specifically, the only other article which picks up many clicks from the AOC disamb is AOC International, and that can be hatnoted. Things like Articles of Confederation usually will not be searched for by initials. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 10 December 2022 

message: Outside the United States, AOC as a reference to a back-bench congressperson from New York is not the most common use of this acronym/initialism.  In Europe, and in English-speaking wine circles, the most common use is an acronym for the French-language phrase appellation d'origine contrôlée, or controlled name of origin in English.  AOCs are the fundamental basis of all French regulation of the geographic names associated with wine production (e.g., Bordeaux, Burgundy, Chablis, Chateauneuf-du-Pape, etc.), and served as the example for similar geographic-based regulation in Spain (DO/DOC), Italy (DOC/DOCG), the United States (AVA), and the European Union generally.  It does nothing but demonstrate an America-centric bias and a political bias to disregard the other uses -- and arguably the primary use -- of the AOC acronym.  AOC the New York politician is a very minor figure in the world, and I say that as an American myself.  2603:8080:2500:2FCB:A4C3:8D9F:E684:512E (talk) 19:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at pageviews (), the politician, widely known by the acronym, has more than 20 times the views of the French label. Based on that, it seems she is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and the current set up is correct. Vpab15 (talk) 22:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's revisit the "primary" use of AOC