Talk:Beijing Love Story (TV series)

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 28 September 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: dabify Beijing Love Story after moving it to Beijing Love Story (film). (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 17:15, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

– WP:TWODABS, and the 2012 TV series is primary because the 2014 film is just a spin-off directed by the same guy. Usually a film reaches a larger audience than a TV series, but in this case the TV series is much more popular and well-received domestically and was shown internationally in several countries not just in Asia but also in Africa and Oceania, including an English-dubbed version in Botswana (see (http://english.cri.cn/12894/2015/04/21/2821s875318.htm]) The film despite grossing over US$67.6 million (another indication of the TV series' popularity domestically) doesn't appear to have as large a global reach. Timmyshin (talk) 06:33, 28 September 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. — Amakuru (talk) 10:27, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the film is better known in English speaking sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:57, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Says who? "Beijing Love Story" + film -tv = 92200 Ghits, "Beijing Love Story" + tv -film = 126000 Ghits. "Beijing Love Story" + "Carina Lau" = 4300 Ghits (Carina Lau starred in the film only), "Beijing Love Story" + "Yang Mi" = 94600 Ghits (Yang Mi Starred in the TV series only). But everyone here knows you never change your vote even if proven 100% wrong, so it's pointless to discuss anything with you. Timmyshin (talk) 12:33, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Pageviews between the two appear to be mostly pretty even, so I don't think there's a good argument for the film as primary. Defaulting to the original TV series makes sense per the second criteria of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and per WP:CONCEPTDAB. Nohomersryan (talk) 15:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support second and oppose first 2601:541:4305:C70:EC99:A9A:7D73:584 (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: since the TV series article was created on September 3, 2016, the film has continued receiving 68.8% of the page views.[1] Of course that will be thrown off a bit as the film is at the base name, and anyone searching for "Beijing Love Story" will end up there. However, the film seems to have received more coverage in English sources and was evidently dubbed in English, and so may qualify as the primary topic on the English Wikipedia.[2][3] On the other hand, Nohomersryan's point about WP:CONCEPTDAB is well taken: the series article could serve as a concept dab, while the film article could not. Either way, both topics are highly notable; it's a close call which to put at the base name.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Dab page at base name, so support second move and oppose first. There is clearly no WP:PTOPIC here, so we put a dab page at the base name per WP:TWODABS. — Amakuru (talk) 13:27, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Dab page at base name, so support second move and oppose first. No primary topic. Andrewa (talk) 04:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.