Talk:Frenzy (disambiguation)

Requested move 14 March 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: not moved. General consensus not to move. (non-admin closure) sst✈ 12:03, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Frenzy (disambiguation) → Frenzy
Frenzy → Frenzy (1972 film)

– there is no one topic which is "more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term". In ictu oculi (talk) 10:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Error in the move request? I'm guessing you meant * Frenzy (disambiguation) → Frenzy Insert CleverPhrase Here 13:51, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as there is no article on Frenzy the emotion, if you can call it that. Frenzy (disambiguation) should stay as it is. - Gothicfilm (talk) 15:00, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Gothicfilm, This is a common misunderstanding of how WP:NOTADICTIONARY works. The real question here is whether the 1972 Hitchcock film is the primary topic or not. If it is, then we leave it, if not then the Dab page becomes Frenzy and the film becomes Frenzy (1972 film), i.e. no primary topic. I haven't made my mind up where I stand on this yet, i'd like to see some statistics. Insert CleverPhrase Here 15:21, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not many people are likely to go to an encyclopedia to look up an emotion called Frenzy. Thus the 1972 film is the primary topic. - Gothicfilm (talk) 15:34, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to agree with you on this one, this is an award winning and esteemed film "Considered Hichcock's last great film" (from the article). Oppose Insert CleverPhrase Here 21:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Looking at the pageview comparison of the topics on the disambiguation page, it shows that Frenzy gets about 74% of pageviews for these topics. That's certainly much more than all the others combined. Of course, because the film article is at the basename, it gets views from people who do not want the film article. So it is also important to note that while the film article gets around 334 views per day, the dab page only gets about 6 views per day, or less than 2% of the traffic to the film article. The film is also a well known work of Alfred Hitchcock, which gives it long-term significance. All together, it seems like a pretty solid primarytopic, and the current setup does a good job directing our readers where they want to go. Dohn joe (talk) 17:57, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: but reformat the dab page to reflect the primary topic, per WP:MOSDAB ... done. PamD 17:30, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support If you add Rage (emotion) to the comparison the picture changes somewhat: pageview comparison showing roughly same number for Rage and Frenzy. I feel that with a long term view the original meaning should not be undervalued. Inwind (talk) 10:47, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, leaning oppose. The film receives 63% of all page views among the 10 articles actually called "Frenzy" (including Joanna Cargill, the superhero). This means it's significantly more likely to be sought by readers than all those other topics combined. However, the question remains as to how many people are searching for the topics with no articles of their own, and especially, if people are searching for Rage (emotion) under "frenzy". There's no firm answer, but it's typically a more popular article than the film.[1]--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:13, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say some of that answer comes from the pageview comparison, which shows that Frenzy gets around 330 views per day, while the dab page only gets about 6 views. Of course that doesn't account for everyone who arrived at the film article looking for Rage (or something else), but it does show that only a small percentage of people opted for the dab page, which is the obvious next step for someone in that scenario. Dohn joe (talk) 15:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good call, I'm leaning oppose.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This time I agree with you guys, the film here is unambiguously the primary topic in this case. Insert CleverPhrase Here 09:54, 18 March 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.