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. Moved to Thomas Pooley blasphemy case by majority agreement that WP:ONEEVENT is relevant here. There were a lot of options, and the nom did not fully support the chosen one, hence if another discussion is desired to settle on a better title (ideally with strong evidence backed in WP:RS), then it can be opened per WP:NOTCURRENTTITLE (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 15:22, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Pooley well-sinker → New name – The name for this page needs to be 'Thomas Pooley', with the words 'well-sinker' added afterwards in brackets, to distinguish him from another Thomas Pooley who already has a Wikipedia page. Urbanora (talk) 22:43, 11 February 2025 (UTC) — Relisting.  ASUKITE 21:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 14:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment He's not notable for sinking wells. A better disambiguation tag is needed. (heretic)? (philosopher)? 162 etc. (talk) 23:34, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It would be misleading to call him a philosopher or a thinker, or even heretic. Perhaps controversialist? Urbanora (talk) 08:35, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Other possibilities for discussion: blasphemer, convict, pantheist, agitator, antireligionist, Cornwall. Station1 (talk) 06:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I think pantheist would work Urbanora (talk) 09:07, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Can we go with pantheist, please? Urbanora (talk) 13:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  These requests are usually open for at least 7 days; more if no consensus is clear. Some disinterested editor will come along eventually and move the article somewhere. Station1 (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to Thomas Pooley blasphemy case, per WP:ONEEVENT, consistent with Asia Bibi blasphemy case. Vpab15 (talk) 23:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  No. This is about a person, not merely a court case, as has been done for other so-called 'blasphemers' e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aikenhead or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_William_Gott Urbanora (talk) 07:34, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Religion and WikiProject Cornwall have been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 21:06, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: So far Thomas Pooley (pantheist) has the most support, but only just barely ASUKITE 21:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Thomas Pooley (religious dissenter), anyone?  Tewdar  09:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  By the way, 'pantheist' appears to fail verification and is sourced to a blog in any case.  Tewdar  09:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Agree it is better than "pantheist". Vpab15 (talk) 10:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Possibly, though dissenter suggest he belonged to a grouping of some sort, which is not the case. But if 'pantheist' is not preferred, then I'm happy with it. Urbanora (talk) 10:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It does indeed include that sense in British religious history. How about Thomas Pooley (religious skeptic) or Thomas Pooley (religious critic)? I'm trying to avoid terms like 'blasphemer' or 'heretic', while including the stuff that makes him notable without being too precise. Thomas Pooley (critic of Christianity), maybe?  Tewdar  11:40, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'd prefer 'religious dissenter'. 'Sceptic' is too mild - his views were too passionate for that. 'Critic' makes him sound like an academic. Urbanora (talk) 12:18, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Great. 'Dissenter' doesn't necessarily imply he was part of a group anyway.  Tewdar  12:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to Thomas Pooley blasphemy case, per Vpab15. Religious dissenters are adherents to a religion that dissents from a mainstream view, such as Christian believers in England (or Cornwall) who dissent from Anglicanism. I get the impression from the article that Pooley was not a Christian, or a believer. DrKay (talk) 15:40, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Pooley was a fervent believer, but was hostile to Christianity as an institution. This whole business would have been a lot easier if we could have called him a well-sinker as I had originally intended. Urbanora (talk) 16:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I have no objections to Thomas Pooley (well-sinker) or Thomas Pooley (well-digger). It's how he's usually described in sources anyway. Obviously it's not what makes him notable, though.  Tewdar  16:22, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I accept "(well-sinker)" as a second choice, but per Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Naming the specific topic articles, "Natural disambiguation that is unambiguous, commonly used, and clear is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation". The blasphemy case is unambiguous, commonly used and clear, as well as natural. Any parenthetical disambiguator should be something that is very frequently associated with him. Consequently, I oppose the suggestions of pantheist, dissenter, religious critic, etc. These are not as frequently used in the sources about him. DrKay (talk) 16:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to Thomas Pooley blasphemy case or similar. It's clear that being a well-sinker is not what is notable about him. He is notable only for being prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned for blasphemy. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:23, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  His views are probably also notable, and receive coverage in reliable sources (and our article about him). This is more like a biography than an article about a single case.  Tewdar  11:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Can we go back to 'pantheist'? I have changed some of the references to a blog (even though it is an excellent, well-researched source) to original documents, including that which refers to his religious beliefs. It should be about him, not how others labelled him. Urbanora (talk) 11:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The blog you mention ([1]) doesn't even contain the word 'pantheist'. Vpab15 (talk) 12:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Not that I'm necessarily supporting it, but 'pantheist' is now sourced to 'Holyoake, G.J. (1857), The Case of Thomas Pooley the Cornish Well Sinker'. Does anyone have access to this source? Does it say Pooley was a pantheist?  Tewdar  13:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The Holyoake source is not available online. It describes his beliefs, including his ideas that the earth itself was God, but doesn't use the word 'pantheist'. The word 'pantheist' is specifically used in one of the essays I cite, Rowe, Iain (2008). 'The Case of Thomas Pooley: A Reinvestigation', http://www.iainrowe.co.uk/Downloads.html Urbanora (talk) 13:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think that source is good enough for the label 'pantheist', and the Rowe source actually is critical of this label.  Tewdar  13:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Can we try 'antireligionist'? This was proposed some time ago, and the Wikipedia definition "opposition to religion or traditional religious beliefs and practices" fits Pooley. Urbanora (talk) 14:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  At first glance, it sounds like 'religious dissenter' might be a more general and accurate term than 'antireligionist'. I agree with Tewdar that 'religious dissenter' does not imply being a part of a group. However, I might personally still prefer 'blasphemy case', as I'm not sure we know enough about his biography that can be traced to reliable sources. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  We know a lot about his biography. There is extensive newspaper coverage, he and members of his family were interviewed by Holyoake, and there is an archive of his correspondence. Urbanora (talk) 16:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You clearly know more than I do about that, so I defer to your judgment on that question. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This debate appears to be exhausted and without a conclusion. Can we please go with 'antireligionist', which is no inaccurate and will at least differentiate him from any other Thomas Pooley. If so, what are the next steps? Urbanora (talk) 10:26, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Religion, WikiProject Biography, and WikiProject Cornwall have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 14:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]