Talk:I Love Her

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

R&B and Soul Music Low‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Primary topic?

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved, only article for this title, MOS:DABMENTIONS can be handled through dab. Partial title matches are not ambiguous. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I Love Her → I Love Her (Marques Houston song) – I have created I Love Her (album) as a redirect to Aku Cinta Dia. Also, this topic is too obscure, and the name is too ambiguous, especially with partial matches, such as And I Love Her. Also, there is the Frijid Pink song with the same name. George Ho (talk) 03:58, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From Jenks24:

This is the only article titled "I Love Her", so arguably does not need disambiguating. As you well know, George, moves such as this have been controversial recently. Definitely needs a full discussion. Jenks24 (talk) 04:01, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguate per nom. 70.24.251.208 (talk) 05:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Obscurity is not a good reason to add a qualifier; if a title is the only or primary topic, then it does not generally need further qualification, regardless of how many hits the article gets. Here, there's one article with this title, and a newly-created redirect - not even a disambiguation page. If the redirect proves to be popular, we can revisit. Dohn joe (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note. Obscurity, of course, is relevant to the question whether a topic is notable to begin with. I'm not familiar with the conventions on notability of individual songs, but I question whether this song is notable enough for an article. Has anyone considered AfD here? (That would make this RM moot, of course.) Dohn joe (talk) 18:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not my forte, but I believe the music project considers all songs that have charted, as this one did, to be notable (see WP:NSONGS). Jenks24 (talk) 02:37, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If a topic is very obscure, and we have multiple possible uses, then obviously it cannot be the primary topic, since it would be too obscure to establish primarity. 70.24.251.208 (talk) 06:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't see any valid reasons or need for disambiguation. --DAJF (talk) 12:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. For now the undisambiguated name should redirect to I Love Her (disambiguation) (which I've just created). Andrewa (talk) 03:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What's your reasoning? Dohn joe (talk) 05:00, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No reason to think that this is the primary topic, or even that there is one. Andrewa (talk) 06:33, 31 May 2012 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.