This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
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)
Mike Cline (
talk) 12:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Support. The doctrine of "primary topic" is applied too zealously in our titling decisions. In the present case it is entirely unhelpful. NoeticaTea? 00:31, 7 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose unless there is some indication for the change of primary topic. (Applying guidelines one editor disagrees with should not be cast as zealotry.) --
JHunterJ (
talk) 15:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Some statistics:
Red Snow (the weapon): viewed 1,892 times in 201203
[1]
Watermelon snow (linked from the disambig page): viewed 3,228 times in 201203
[2]
30 Days of Night: Red Snow: viewed 675 times in 201203
[3]
I think this conflates "red snow" and "Red Snow", and consequently page views for
Red snow and
Red Snow, the former not yet having been quantified here.
ENeville (
talk) 18:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose – The only other article ambiguous with "Red Snow" (in Title Caps) is:
Red Snow (The Twilight Zone): viewed 560 times in 201203
[5]
Even if all those page views are subtracted from Red Snow (the weapon) as click-throughs in search of the television episode, typed in with the Title Caps, the weapon article still has many more page views. I would observe that
red snow redirects to
Red Snow (disambiguation), which seems to obviate arguments based on alternative capitalizations, since lower case would be the default used in searches absent a more particular topic sought.
Given the various capitalizations of red snow that are listed, including for "red snow", I would think that the dab page should be moved to
red snow.
ENeville (
talk) 21:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Does that mean that you prefer the proposed arrangement to the existing arrangement, ENeville? Do we agree on this: we should not assume that the typical reader – with sketchy information, looking for the certainty that an encyclopedia can provide – is somehow magically prepared already with information about capitalisation in the target title. NoeticaTea? 01:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure exactly what question is posed, but I offer this: the average person searching on Wikipedia will enter "red snow", and get redirected from
red snow to a dab page at
Red Snow (disambiguation). I think the dab page should reside instead at
red snow. I also think that someone who takes the trouble to enter "Red Snow" is looking for a proper noun, consistent with naming policy at
WP:TITLEFORMAT. Given that only two article titles are ambiguous in the "Red Snow" namespace, and the article on the weapon is viewed at least twice as often (even accounting for click-throughs) then it is primary per
WP:PRIMARY and should stay at
Red Snow.
ENeville (
talk) 18:15, 12 April 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.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
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)
Mike Cline (
talk) 12:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Support. The doctrine of "primary topic" is applied too zealously in our titling decisions. In the present case it is entirely unhelpful. NoeticaTea? 00:31, 7 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose unless there is some indication for the change of primary topic. (Applying guidelines one editor disagrees with should not be cast as zealotry.) --
JHunterJ (
talk) 15:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Some statistics:
Red Snow (the weapon): viewed 1,892 times in 201203
[1]
Watermelon snow (linked from the disambig page): viewed 3,228 times in 201203
[2]
30 Days of Night: Red Snow: viewed 675 times in 201203
[3]
I think this conflates "red snow" and "Red Snow", and consequently page views for
Red snow and
Red Snow, the former not yet having been quantified here.
ENeville (
talk) 18:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose – The only other article ambiguous with "Red Snow" (in Title Caps) is:
Red Snow (The Twilight Zone): viewed 560 times in 201203
[5]
Even if all those page views are subtracted from Red Snow (the weapon) as click-throughs in search of the television episode, typed in with the Title Caps, the weapon article still has many more page views. I would observe that
red snow redirects to
Red Snow (disambiguation), which seems to obviate arguments based on alternative capitalizations, since lower case would be the default used in searches absent a more particular topic sought.
Given the various capitalizations of red snow that are listed, including for "red snow", I would think that the dab page should be moved to
red snow.
ENeville (
talk) 21:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Does that mean that you prefer the proposed arrangement to the existing arrangement, ENeville? Do we agree on this: we should not assume that the typical reader – with sketchy information, looking for the certainty that an encyclopedia can provide – is somehow magically prepared already with information about capitalisation in the target title. NoeticaTea? 01:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure exactly what question is posed, but I offer this: the average person searching on Wikipedia will enter "red snow", and get redirected from
red snow to a dab page at
Red Snow (disambiguation). I think the dab page should reside instead at
red snow. I also think that someone who takes the trouble to enter "Red Snow" is looking for a proper noun, consistent with naming policy at
WP:TITLEFORMAT. Given that only two article titles are ambiguous in the "Red Snow" namespace, and the article on the weapon is viewed at least twice as often (even accounting for click-throughs) then it is primary per
WP:PRIMARY and should stay at
Red Snow.
ENeville (
talk) 18:15, 12 April 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.