Talk:CAMRA

Redirect

Campaign for Real Ale has global significance, and a worldwide membership, and is largely known under the name CAMRA. Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, CAMRA should redirect to Campaign for Real Ale. See this, this and this. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. From a UK perspective then certainly CAMRA only has one meaning, but Wikipedia is a global encyclopaedia. Let's see what the other contributors think. --Bob Re-born (talk) 10:12, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

It may help to read the links provided above. CAMRA is globally acknowledged to be the primary acronym for Campaign for Real Ale, and under our guidelines that makes it the primary topic. The Canberra organisation officially abbreviate their name as "CAMRA Inc" or "CAMRA, Inc" (possibly to avoid confusion with CAMRA), are little known under their full or abbreviated name, and the Wikipedia article on them averages less than 3 page views a day, while the Campaign for Real Ale article averages over 100 a day. The CAMRA redirect was created for the Campaign for Real Ale article, and that's the way it has been for seven years. I fully support people being bold; however, it is normally the case that when a bold move has been challenged and reverted, that people then enter into a discussion rather than getting into an edit war. People who want to make a change are encouraged to make their case (or at least to read any evidence provided) before making reverts. People are welcome (encouraged) to do their own research into this matter and provide evidence here that the CAMRA acronym is as well known for the Canberra Academy group as it is for the Campaign for Real Ale. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 16:29, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

As there has been no response I'll be restoring this to how it should be. If anyone thinks otherwise, please put forward some evidence before reverting. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 23:13, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Give it time. There is no time limit on Wikipedia and certainly not 18 hours. --Bob Re-born (talk) 08:29, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Bob - you really need to be putting forward a reason for your behaviour - it's starting to appear disruptive. This has been a standard redirect for over seven years, and the rationale given for the change ("The beer group has good PR, but isn't really a significant organization from a global perspective") is far from the documented evidence. When restoring the redirect I gave evidence above to show that the CAMRA acronym is primarily identified with the beer organisation. You reverted without providing counter evidence, and apparently without having looked at my comments, given that you reverted with the comment "Please discuss on talk page", and your response above was done after you reverted. I pointed out that the change to a disamb page was wrong, and that in the circumstances your revert was wrong, and that the onus is on those pursuing to change to supply evidence when challenged rather than to engage in an edit war. I waited for a response - there was none, even though you continued to edit after I posted. You cannot revert based on your personal disagreement - you need to put forward a rationale and some evidence. It will take you no longer than 10 minutes to do a quick search which will show that this disamb page is inappropriate. Please do that research yourself, and if you agree, then undo your revert. If you don't agree then provide your reason and your evidence. This won't take long - go to Google.com, type in CAMRA, and note the results. Select a dictionary, encyclopedia or acronym finder of your choice, and type in CAMRA and note the results. Go to Google Books and Google News and do the same thing. If you simply carry on editing without doing this, then the assumption will be that you reverted to make a point. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

As the one who made the disambiguation page, I guess I'm compelled to comment. I agree with Bob that a more worldwide perspective calls for a disambiguation page. It's a British organization pushing for an idealized British experience; the call for the traditional British public house has no meaning to most cultures around the world. In terms of Wikipedia statistics, 100 page views a day doesn't particularly strike me as so overwhelming as to call for a redirect, and these two organizations aren't the only ones that use the "CAMRA" acronym. Check Google for many others. Acronym Finder lists at least six organizations. I also dispute the idea that the Campaign for Real Ale has a great impact outside the rather limited beer connoisseur community; it's actually largely unknown to the wider public, which is really the only time an acronym should be a redirect, in my view. What we really need to do is expand this page to include other organizations that use it as well.oknazevad (talk) 14:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I understand and accept that Oknazevad and Bob Re-born are unaware of the significance of CAMRA, the beer organisation. I understand that from their perspective this is a beer organisation who are little known outside of the UK, and have little significance outside the world of beer. That's fine - we are not expected to know about everything. What I suggest in order to resolve this matter is that one or both of them do the research indicated which will indicate that the primary use globally in the English speaking world of the acronym CAMRA is to identify the British beer organisation. It doesn't really matter how they personally regard the beer organisation or their their point of view on the topic, what matters is what the majority of people who type CAMRA in Wikipedia's search engine are expecting to find. As part of the evidence for this is the page views of the articles. CAMRA has been viewed 1762 times in the last 30 days, with a spike of 239 views on the 27th of Jan. Campaign for Real Ale has been viewed 6623 times in the last 30 days, with a spike of 2976 views on the 27th of Jan. Canberra Academy of Music and Related Arts has been viewed 88 times in the last 30 days, and received 1 view on the 27th of Jan. On the 27th of Jan at least 238 people who entered CAMRA in the search engine wanted the article on the beer organisation; 1 person may have wanted either the Canberra article or the beer article. Over the 30 days, of the 1762 who entered CAMRA in the search engine, only 88 at most wanted the Canberra article, which means at least 1673 wanted the beer article. This disamb page is inconveniencing an average of over 1,500 people each month. While this disamb page is in place, an average of 50 people each day are inconvenienced. Mistakes happen, none of us are fully knowledgeable about everything, and I admire people who are bold. I make mistakes all the time. No problem there. It's how we behave when mistakes are pointed out that matters. This little matter should not be taking up this much time to resolve. This is not a grey area, this is a case of a globally well known acronym such as NASA, BBC or LCD also being used by another organisation. This matter can be verified in minutes by a little research. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I reverted your change. There is no time limit on Wikipedia discussions. You are the only person who thinks CAMRA should redirect to the campaign for real ale. One person's opinion is not consensus. --Bob Re-born (talk) 23:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

"You are the only person who thinks CAMRA should redirect to the campaign for real ale" - Eh? How do you work that out? How about the access statistics? I am certainly one other person who thinks that - and why have all these masses who think the redirect is wrong stayed silent all this time? The evidence suggests to me that YOU are the only person who thinks it shouldn't. There is no time limit, but what are we waiting for? A revelation from the skies above? There's no time limit on your counter-argument, so where is it? Nem Con counts as a consensus in my book. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 23:45, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

In the past 14 days, while the disambiguation page has been in place, CAMRA has been accessed an average of 40 times a day; Campaign_for_Real_Ale has been accessed an average of 120 times a day; while Canberra_Academy_of_Music_and_Related_Arts has been accessed an average of 3 times a day. There is no evidence of people going from CAMRA to Canberra_Academy_of_Music_and_Related_Arts in sufficent numbers to justify a disambiguation page. However, there is clear evidence that at least 92% are going from CAMRA to Campaign_for_Real_Ale. I have asked related WikiProjects to comment on this issue. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 16:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, redirect. CAMRA should redirect to Campaign for Real Ale: the Canberra arts organisation appears to be of questionable notability (no independent sources, article originally created by self-admitted COI editor, large proportion of article is biography of two directors rather than about the organisation). The Campaign for Real Ale is a substantial organisation, extremely well known in the UK and, from SilkTork's statistics, clearly the primary usage. (And in case anyone is not aware, there is ample precedent for a topic to be the primary usage of a term, such as an abbreviation, which is not the article title, eg HP). Move the dab page to CAMRA (disambiguation). PamD 16:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The term is ambiguous, so a disambig page is required. If you think the page should be a redirect, then the disambig page will have to be moved, in which case you can follow the process at Wikipedia:Requested moves. CAMRA is only well known amongst English beer obsessives, most people in the rest of the world don't care or have never heard of them. It is ridiculous to compare it with NASA or LCD. SilkTork's (uncited) statistics are based on made up assumptions about what people are looking for. Most of those hits are just people just can't spell camera. --Vclaw (talk) 17:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

No - Disambig Given that there are numerous organisations with the same or similar acronyms it stands to reason that this page needs to be a disambig page as opposed to a redirect. Just because one article has a greater usage than the other is no reason why this should be a straight redirect and ignore all other topics. The are numerous examples where just because there may be one article which is being accessed with the same name does not mean that a disambig page should not exist.

According to WP:DAB "Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead. In this situation there must be a way for the reader to navigate quickly from the page that first appears to any of the other possible desired articles." Dan arndt (talk) 00:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

You need to read WP:DAB more than superficially. Yes, disambiguation as a process is required -- however there are several methods for achieving disambiguation, one of which is a primary topic with a disambiguation hatnote. older ≠ wiser 01:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Redirect. For all the frenzied digging, there are only two Wikipedia pages in question - and I strongly suspect that the Campaign for Real Ale (which IS an international organisation) has the higher profile even in Australia. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 19:53, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Dab page

An editor over-wrote this redirect with a dab page, but I do not believe this is appropriate during the discussion at WP:RfD so I have copied that dab page content to CAMRA (disambiguation). As a dab page is purely mechanical and has no intellectual content I understand that a copy and paste move is acceptable in these circumstances. In fact that dab page content then needed substantial cleanup, which I have done. I have left it formatted as "dab page where there is no primary topic", as created, although when the dust settles it will need to be reformatted if CAMRA still redirects to the Campaign for Real Ale as primary topic. PamD 08:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)