Talk:White Rabbit (disambiguation)

Torrini

white rabbit is also the name of an emilianna torrini song —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.49.219 (talk • contribs) 13:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To Marcus22

I don't appreciate your "Undid revision 173000971 by Weasel5i2 (talk)never heard of them - out it goes" edit of this article. I believe that it goes against everything Wikipedia is about, which is the sharing of knowledge by MULTIPLE individuals.

Obviously, by your Undo action, you consider YOUR knowledge to be the de facto standard for everyone else's knowledge. Did it ever even occur to you to check Google and verify the existence of the fact which I placed in the article? Apparently not.

Incidentally, I've never heard of the indie rock band, "White Rabbits" from NYC. That doesn't mean I even remotely consider myself as having the authority to remove it from the article! You need to think twice before doing things. I'm afraid to look at your contribs because I might find all sorts of other innocent bits of info which you indiscriminately removed because you "haven't heard of them"!

For starters, try this on for size. Note the first result returned: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22airplane+crashers%22

Weasel5i2 (talk) 09:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh grow up. Marcus22 (talk) 12:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, nice reply. That's all you have to say, prior to REMOVING MY EDIT AGAIN?Really mature. I stated facts and that's all you can say? Go ahead and keep removing my edit, I will keep putting it back. I am also now looking for the proper channels to file a complaint with Wikipedia against you.

Weasel5i2 (talk) 16:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- I didnt reply because - for no reason whatsoever - you were rude, unpleasant and uncivil. I wont reply again either unless you change your tone. But note that your "edit" is an attempt to insert a track by a band with only 480 unique G Hits. In other words, as far as I can tell, it's not worth being in Wikipedia. End of. Marcus22 (talk) 17:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the rude tone, it is because I felt that your first edit comment and reasoning was a bit snide and pointed at me for putting them there in the first place.

Also, I realized it's not right for me to complain against you, as you are doing what you believe to be right and I don't disagree with that. However, I did submit this to the WP:Third opinion process, so hopefully we can have another person's neutral view on this issue. I realize that you may consider them non-notable, but by keeping their mention out of Wikipedia you are depriving others from knowing about them altogether. I added them in the first place because there was absolutely no mention of them.

In the immortal words of so many others before me, "Who/What does it hurt by keeping this entry in Wikipedia?" I mean, it's obviously not frivolous or untrue information; I'm not affiliated with this group in any way (and as far as I know, they don't even exist/perform anymore!) and I also believed that by adding a (not-yet-existent) wikilink to the band's name, it would have inspired someone to eventually come along and create the article!

Weasel5i2 (talk) 17:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Well that's better. Thankyou for the apology. I accept it. "Who/What does it hurt by keeping this entry in Wikipedia?" is a fine argument and I would, personally, choose to list EVERYTHING in Wikipedia - but too often I have argued exactly as you only to be voted down. At the moment, this entry really isnt sufficiently notable to be in Wikipedia. But what the hell, after all it's not a whole article and if it matters to you - as you have taken the time to be civil - please DO put it back! regards Marcus22 (talk) 17:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will do even better.. ^_^ This incident has inspired me to collect as much information as possible to validate their inclusion in Wikipedia. It seems that the "Airplane Crashers" was just one incarnation of a trio of individuals who released many songs during the "New Beat" movement of the 80s.. If I can paraphrase the information from here http://www.discogs.com/artist/Morton+Sherman+Bellucci and find more facts, I think I may have the ingredients for a good addition to the New Beat article, or perhaps even a new article unto itself for the Morton/Sherman/Bellucci trio! Weasel5i2 (talk) 17:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I looked in here to see how the dispute was going and saw that it has resolved: well done, you two. I have removed it from the Third opinion listings. — Athaenara ✉ 07:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (September 2010)

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was Speedy close as move request from disruptive user (see contribution history). --RegentsPark (talk) 02:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

White rabbit → White rabbit (disambiguation) — White rabbit is White Rabbit from Lewis Carroll. 75.142.152.104 (talk) 22:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I am inclined to agree here. The redirect page at White rabbit (disambiguation) would need to be removed first. So I can't do this myself. Phatom87 ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:32, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Requested move (early December 2010)

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: no reasoning provided, and opposition outweighs any support Kotniski (talk) 08:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

White Rabbit (disambiguation) → White rabbit —Relisted. Macr86 (talk) 19:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC) No reason provided for move. Macr86 (talk) 03:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I presume this is proposed based on the idea that there is no primary topic for White Rabbit. And I'm not sure there is one. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:10, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there have been numerous move requests at Talk:White Rabbit similar to this move request. This user also unilaterally moved the article White Rabbit previously. 65.94.47.218 (talk) 05:48, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment can someone checkuser Macr86 (talk · contribs) ? His/her edit history is remarkably similar to 75.142.152.104 (talk · contribs), who has a topic ban in relation to white rabbit move requests. 65.94.47.218 (talk) 05:48, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Move. To most people a White Rabbit is a white rabbit (usually an albino), not some children's story character. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So the article about albino rabbits could be titled "white rabbit", but the disambiguation page is titled with the ambiguous title. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The ambiguous title is "White Rabbit" -- see the list of articles that could possibly be titled "White Rabbit" (the list in the disambiguation page). -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Close Macr86 has already put in a ridiculous number of move requests on this topic at Talk:White Rabbit#related move request for 2010 December, along with a few undiscussed moves. It's too soon to challenge established consensus yet again. Macr86's obsession with this article title has become disruptive. --JaGa^talk 15:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This has become a mess. Clearly White Rabbit has a primary topic as agreed in consensus a number of times now. White rabbit, however, is clearly worthy a disambiguation page. I am not sure why White Rabbit (disambiguation) was created - it, surely, should exist at White rabbit (which redirects here). What a mess.--Errant ^(chat!) 00:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not this shit again. The character from the Alice works is clearly the primary use of the term "White Rabbit", and these repeated disruptive nominations with no rationale or broken rationales are seriously disruptive. Unless there's an actual reason given to move this page, we ought to speedy close this - and any other future requests that don't have an in-depth rationale. — Gavia immer (talk) 05:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree.. although I would point out this proposal seems to related to White rabbit (note lower case r), so for once Macr86 might have a point. To be clear: this page was moved from White rabbit to here on 5 December. There seems no sensible reason for doing so... & I believe it is not our disambiguation policy to do so. Unfortunately it's not fixable because Macr86 then edited the redirect left at White rabbit :(--Errant ^(chat!) 10:13, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, and request explanation for the move from User:JHunterJ. Powers ^T 13:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support move back to White rabbit - Yeh, clear consensus existed against this move. It needs another move request to overturn the current consensus and to be moved back in the interim. As it stands this is the primary topic by quite a clear margin. Macr86 (talk) 00:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Quite strongly oppose. This page is not about white rabbits; it is (with two marginal exceptions) about people and things called White Rabbit (so capped). Lewis Carroll's Rabbit is primary usage among them; but that means be should have a disambiguation page for the others, called by the present name. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:16, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move, recognising that LC's White Rabbit is the primary meaning, and all keep our senses of humour at least running in the background. Think of how much LC would love this continued and sublimely repetitive nonsense surrounding this favourite caricature of overly ernest people. It would be such a terrible, terrible shame to disparage it. Lose your sense of humour and you start worrying about things that don't really matter, and that ain't funny. Andrewa (talk) 21:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guys. This is the disambiguation pages for White rabbit (not the lower case r). It was moved here out of policy and White rabbit redirects here. We don't usually have disambiguation pages named in this way if the top level page is available. --Errant ^(chat!) 22:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not true, this is White Rabbit (disambiguation) (note the upper case R) and nearly all of the entries relate to uses of White Rabbit (note the upper case R). True, White rabbit redirects here at present and this is pragmatic and correct. You do make a good point in that the proposed target is White rabbit not White Rabbit. That's another problem with this proposal; As noted, the entries almost all use the upper case R. No change of vote. Andrewa (talk) 09:11, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reasonable point; although it is worth pointing out that this page was moved here from White rabbit a short time ago. It is my understanding of disambiguation pages that we do not care overly about capitalisation and treat White Rabbit and White rabbit as the same word; as we have a top level page, the disambiguation page should be there. (I'm not sure why I'm so enthusiastic about getting it back there :P) --Errant ^(chat!) 10:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Christmas! Well, it already is where I am, and the Rest Of The World will soon catch up.

Point taken about recent move. IMHO we're not at all consistent about whether a difference in capitalisation is sufficient or even significant disambiguation. It seems to me that it should never be, that this was a very early decision in Wikipedia, reflected in the design of Mediawiki, and while WP:consensus can change we'd want to be particularly thorough in establishing and documenting this consensus before recognising such a change as this, and we haven't. But many exceptions have been allowed over the years, and I don't think there's a clear guideline (very happy to be proven wrong on this last point, a policy or guideline would be good).

So there are two questions:

(1) Is there a primary meaning if White Rabbit/white rabbit? ISTM that there is, and that it's Alice's ridiculously over-serious watch-governed acquaintance. So the article on this curious fellow goes at White Rabbit, and white rabbit should redirect there.

(2) Should the DAB be at White Rabbit (disambiguation) or white rabbit (disambiguation)? Again, it seems to me that the majority of uses are proper nouns, so we should go for the capitalised version.

But my main message is still, don't stress, Wikipedia will survive any decision on this, and we should all encourage our fellow contributors to survive it too. Andrewa (talk) 20:52, 24 December 2010 (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.

Proposed page move (late December 2010)

procedural nomination? What procedure? Don't keep opening new move requests the instant one is closed... --Errant ^(chat!) 21:29, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

White Rabbit (disambiguation) → White rabbit — Relisting per Talk:White Rabbit (disambiguation)#Requested move (early December 2010). Procedural nomination only, I am neutral. Macr86 (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So what "procedure" makes you feel compelled to propose it again?--Kotniski (talk) 20:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy close per lack of proponent and above recent discussion. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Obsequious move requests by Macr86 (January 2011)

See User_talk:Anthony_Appleyard#White Rabbit (disambiguation) requested move, where Macr86 (talk · contribs) on January 1st 2011 directly proposed to an administrator to perform this move request, even after being refused here twice! 184.144.163.241 (talk) 12:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone seems to have developed something of an obsession with this page. I suggest we ignore them.--Kotniski (talk) 12:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it's time for a topic ban. This is ridiculous. --JaGa^talk 19:55, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:AjaxSmack#White Rabbit (disambiguation) requested move, proposed to an administrator to perform this move request, even after being refused here twice! Macr86 (talk) 03:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Macr86 (talk · contribs) just tried to delete White rabbit, which appears to be a campaign to hide a move of the disambiguation page from common review. See http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=White_rabbit&diff=prev&oldid=407562310 -- 65.93.14.196 (talk) 06:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]