Talk:Exercise (disambiguation)

Requested move 21 March 2018

 * 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: the move of the disambiguation page is not supported at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 17:40, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Exercise (disambiguation) → Exercise – It has no primary topic. 192.107.120.90 (talk) 14:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Support The discussion at Talk:Physical exercise is opposing moving physical exercise to exercise, so the disambiguation page should be moved to the base title. Plantdrew (talk) 15:31, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose This is an appropriate WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT simply based on the dominating abundance of physical activity-related incoming links (Special:WhatLinksHere/Exercise). Maybe, just maybe, if someone goes through and fixes those links to point to the appropriate specific articles, then we could take another look at this. But we shouldn't disrupt such a common linking practice right now. -- Netoholic @  09:12, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I disagree: Wikipedia is for readers not editors. If there's a clean up to be done, we should do the clean up, not avoid doing something because it would need to be cleaned up. I therefore volunteer! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose Physical exercise certainly is the primary topic, and no justification has been given why not.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose, per above comments. Logical primary redirect. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. The discussion at Physical exercise referenced above, with Physical exercise not moved to Exercise, infers that "Physical exercise" is not the primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that's a misread. That prior move discussion was SNOW closed with only 4 votes and only running for about 3 hours. It should have been left open for longer, as the discussion had little chance to reach a consensus at all. I'm tempted to go to move review, after I contact the closer. -- Netoholic @  10:35, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's a misread. I was one of the four snow votes (a light snow, not enough to make a snow-angel), and my reasoning was that 'Physical exercise' is a better descriptor because of the other uses. But in this RM I'm an "oppose" because this is about the redirect of the term 'Exercise', and the obvious redirect for that term is 'Physical exercise'. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:56, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see now: thank you for encouraging me to look harder. Not only was the other RM faultily closed, but this RM is mutually dependent on it.  Perhaps both RMs could be suspended, and a combined RM opened. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:40, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think it was faultily closed or that this RM has much in common with it as much as the affirmation that "exercise" definitions are separated into various techniques or fields of study. That doesn't mean that "physical exercise" isn't the primary and common name redirect of "Exercise", just that there are several forms of exercise besides that labeled as physical. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:44, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I think closing a RM in just over 3 hours is pretty faulty. What's the rush? I've seen a decent argument swing RMs all the time. -- Netoholic @ 17:36, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, don't misunderstand, I think it should have stayed open longer. But at the time nobody objected or else the closer would have likely opened it up again (although I'm saying this without again looking back on the RM). Randy Kryn (talk) 19:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * FYI: that RM has gone to Move review.  Paine Ellsworth   put'r there  13:47, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Of the potentially conflicting titles, physical exercise is clearly the primary topic. The closure of Talk:Physical exercise should absolutely not be accepted as any kind of precedent.--Aervanath (talk) 17:35, 27 March 2018 (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.