Talk:Bubblin' (Blue song)
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bubblin' (Blue song) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Requested move
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived 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: Not moved (non-admin closure) --Mdann52talk to me! 13:52, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Bubblin' (Blue song) → Bubblin'
Bubblin' → Bubblin' (disambiguation)
– I know it's not the most successful song ever, but it's definitely more notable than the Cru song. Unreal7 (talk) 00:52, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose. I've honestly never heard of either one. Steel1943 (talk) 01:51, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose: Per WP:NCM / WP:SONGDAB, the names of artists should be included in the titles of articles about their songs and albums. That makes the titles more clear and recognizable, and avoids future maintenance headaches over whether to consider some particular song or album as primary. Including the name of the artist is helpful to readers, the popularity of music is volatile, and new releases often appear with the same names (or strings of lyrics that might be mistaken for a name). Also, the term probably has other meanings that should be included on the dab page – it is simply a truncated word, after all. —BarrelProof (talk) 02:58, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- The page you linked to says to use disambiguation when necessary, the argument here is that disambiguation is not necessary in this title. Apart from the less notable song, I can't see anything within Wikipedia that is likely to be searched for using the truncated form of the word. Creation with a disambiguated title isn't a reason to keep it disambiguated. Peter James (talk) 18:30, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Footnote: This is a malformed multi-page move request. It should have been submitted differently. To fix this problem, I have manually placed a move request notice at Talk:Bubblin'. —BarrelProof (talk) 03:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- (I have done the same by making this a multi-move request by adding the intended additional move.) Soon after, a bot should post an automatic move request notification on Talk:Bubblin'. In addition, the move request should show up properly on WP:RM after a bot updates the listings. Steel1943 (talk) 04:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- (Additional sidenote: Bubblin' is a disambiguation page with only two entries, so it will most likely get deleted if this move request occurs, but this cleans up the appearance of the move discussion and allows bots to do the work they need to do.) Steel1943 (talk) 04:14, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose - this a completely pointless ambiguation. Unreal7 if "I know it's not the most successful song ever" then why do you wish it to be made hard to find for readers? It only makes life difficult for readers by playing hide-the-artist-name, unless the song is a mega famous surprise hit, more famous than the artist. In this case neither of these songs would pass a print sources AfD, and neither is more famous than the non-famous artists who recorded them, and the one you say is less well known comes up first in Billboard.... In ictu oculi (talk) 09:17, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Support WP:TWODABS and I've redirected the other article. Peter James (talk) 18:30, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Question: Anyways, I just read through WP:TWODABS, and since it is a description on when there should be or not be a disambiguation page with only two entries ... are you supporting or opposing this move? (Also, I bolded the word "Bubblin'" in Da Dirty 30 so that readers know why Bubblin' (Cru song) redirected them there.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- I must have remembered wrong, I thought there was something about primary topic being less of a margin if only two topics, something I've seen somewhere but can't remember where. Maybe TWODABS doesn't apply, as there's also a song by Boris from the album Live My Life. The Blue song still appears to be the primary topic based on Google search, and on grok.se shows 90-days page views at 218 (152+66) for the Cru song combined with plain title and 1479 for the Blue song. Peter James (talk) 19:20, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Strong and easy support as per WP:TWODABS, which I highly recommend reading. Red Slash 01:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose. I am going to undo the redirect for the Bubblin' (Cru song) (as happened about 3/4 times before by other editors) because it made #23 in a Billboard chart. If somebody thinks it should not be part of WP, please feel free to AfD. Having established the second song is notable I am reminded of WP:TWODABS and read it. The relevant part (and taking into consideration the words of the nomination), are :-
If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, but neither one is the primary topic, then it is appropriate to have a disambiguation page at the base name. For example, John Quested is a disambiguation page for the two people by that name who can be found in the encyclopedia:
John Quested may refer to:
- John Quested (aviator) (1893–1948), English World War I flying ace
- John Quested (producer) (born 1935), film producer and owner and chairman of Goldcrest Films
--Richhoncho (talk) 10:37, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- 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.