Talk:Weber

‹ The template below (WikiProject Disambiguation) is being considered for merging with Talk page of disambiguation page. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

Disambiguation

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation

On 15 April 2025, it was proposed that this article be moved to Weber (disambiguation). The result of the discussion was not moved.

Requested move 15 April 2025

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 17:10, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weber → Weber (disambiguation)Weber (disambiguation) – As per our policies regarding primary topics, Max Weber is the predominant topic for this title. The page views of Weber's article are more than those of the other prominent listed topics combined and the other possible redirect targets. The majority of the linked articles have less than a thousand page views. Meanwhile, in Google Scholar, a search for "Weber" almost exclusively leads to discussions of Max Weber, when it does not bring up his writings. The unit does not get nearly the same amount of attention, and the two companies have little real long-term significance. Carl Maria von Weber is the closest, but his article gets much less views than Max Weber's article does. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 15:19, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The policy states: A topic is primary for a term with respect to usage if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term. Although Max Weber may well be a more popular page than all others listed at Weber, that does not mean this is the topic most readers are thinking of when they search Weber alone. WikiNav indicates that Weber (surname) is the most popular destination readers navigate to from Weber, accounting for ≈25% of outgoing WP traffic, followed distantly by Weber (unit), Weber Inc., and then in fourth place, Max Weber, which accounts for 0.1% of outgoing WP traffic. A regular Google search (not Scholar) for Weber mostly returns results for the Weber Inc. line of grills and barbecues. Using Google Scholar biases the results—the absence of scholarly discourse about the grill manufacturer is not an indication of its notability or popularity. All indications are that Weber alone is not primarily used to refer to Max Weber, especially absent other context. This is unsurprising given Weber/Webber is an extremely common name attached to numerous people, places, and things. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:50, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since people sometimes object that one person's reported Google search results are unreliable because of all the data they collect on users to individualize results, DuckDuckGo similarly prioritizes the grill. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:19, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Myceteae. My first thought was Weber Inc., which was included in their comment. Steel1943 (talk) 16:57, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...AKA "the grill". Steel1943 (talk) 19:41, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, no primary topic. 162 etc. (talk) 17:13, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:27, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.