Talk:Facelift (disambiguation)

smas
smas is an abreviation for supeficial musculo aponevrotic system of the face; this anatomocal study has been presented by dr vladimir mitz and all,working in a team with professor paul tessier in paris; this work has been presented to the french society of plastic surgery in 1973,dr skoog being present in the room; the study has been published in the plastic and reconstructive surgery journal in 1976; since that time dr vladimir mitz has developped the biplane face lift procedure,still widely used nowadays,for its exceptionnal natural results! Vladimirmitz 16:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

If this is a disambiguation page...
why does it contain an article about one of the usages of the heading term? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.32.55 (talk • contribs)


 * Based on a brief discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation, I plan to:


 * 1) move this page to Facelift (disambiguation)
 * 2) edit it (back) to being consistent with WP:MOSDAB
 * 3) create a new Facelift page that redirects to Rhytidectomy


 * If there are objections, let me know here. (John User:Jwy talk) 02:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Completed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwy (talk • contribs) 05:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Movement of DAB and redirect
Previously, we had: Facelift as a redirect to Rhytidectomy, and Facelift (disambiguation) listing:
 * Facelift (product)
 * Facelift (automobile)
 * Facelift (album)
 * Facelift (TV series)
 * "Face Lift" (CSI) -> CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (season 1)
 * "Facelift" -> Third (Soft Machine album)

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC informs:

A topic is primary for a term, with respect to usage, if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term.

A topic is primary for a term, with respect to long-term significance, if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term.


 * (Facelift ->) Rhytidectomy has 3034 PVs in the last 30 days. (with a subset attributable to the redirect)
 * Facelift (product) has 262 PVs.
 * Facelift (automobile) has 1874 PVs.
 * Facelift (album) has 7179 PVs.
 * Facelift (TV series) has 88 PVs.
 * "Face Lift" (CSI) -> CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (season 1) has 3355 PVs. (subset attributable)
 * "Facelift" -> Third (Soft Machine album) has 2277 PVs. (subset attributable)

Usage is not shown for Rhytidectomy and is arguable for Facelift (album). Long-term significance may likely be Rhytidectomy. Further, Special:WhatLinksHere/Facelift shows a litany of celebrity and automotive links, with are currently blindly redirected to Rhytidectomy.

As such, I have moved Facelift (disambiguation) to Facelift, with Facelift now serving as the DAB for such inbound links. UW Dawgs (talk) 00:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your WP:CUTANDPASTE move. If you think rhytidectomy is not the primary topic, please propose a proper page move of the disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 01:53, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Rhytidectomy alone fails on usage, much less the subset attributable to the alternate term of 'facelift,' as noted above. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That may well be, but it doesn't excuse a cut and paste move. older ≠ wiser 02:05, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 23 July 2015

 * 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: no consensus to move. Calidum T&#124;C 23:12, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Facelift (disambiguation) → Facelift – Facelift currently serves as a redirect to an article to which it is not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC per usage, as shown in the above section. Request is to move Facelift (disambiguation) to Facelift, allowing it to serve as DAB UW Dawgs (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose the album does not appear in the first 100 google hits, almost all of which is for the surgery, and google news all refers metaphorically to the surgical procedural, as do almost all of google books his (either actually or metaphorically), without the album in any sight -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:34, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * This move is about the disambiguation page, not the album?? starship.paint ~  KO   04:39, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The nominator bases the move rationale on the prominence of the album. The album is not prominent, so the rationale fails to capture real world usage. If the album isn't in contention for primarity, there is no reason to find the surgical procedure isn't primary. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * No, it's based on the lack of a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. UW Dawgs (talk) 06:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Like I said, it is based on the prominence of the album. There cannot be a "lack" of primarity without another topic to dispute that primarity -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:01, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Again, no. The lack of a clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is shown by the aggregate behavior of the other articles (plural).  At no point have I made the argument you are ascribing to me. Please desist. Cheers. UW Dawgs (talk) 18:33, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Correct, has no to impact to the album page.
 * Currently:
 * Facelift (disambiguation) (Serves as DAB)
 * Facelift -> Rhytidectomy


 * Proposed:
 * Facelift (Serves as DAB)
 * Facelift (disambiguation) -> Facelift UW Dawgs (talk) 05:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Only a 30 day period is a small sample size, which may indicate skewed results based on recentism and recent news spikes (Isn't the band Alice in Chains been in the news and on tour recently? And isn't it the 25th anniversary of the Facelift album? That could explain the recentism and news spikes during this year, especially for something celebrating a 25th/silver aniversary) And as the IP notes, when just searching "facelift" into Google, it takes a while before you get anything close to the album. IMO, there is an indication of long-term significance regarding the surgery procedure, but questionable evidence based on usage regarding the album -- again there may be only recent interest and traffic during these past few months just because both the album and the band Alice in Chains are currently celebrating their 25th year. And no evidence on what the pages would be like on a "normal" basis. Thus not enough to warrant a change to the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT at this time. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:55, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * oppose per Zzyzx11 --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * re usage, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says ( emphasis mine ) "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to usage, if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined —to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term."
 * Even if your theory of a 25th aniversary spike on Facelift (album) were true, you can drop that article's traffic to ~15% of current levels and Rhytidectomy would still fail the usage compoment based on the first four articles linked on the current DAB (ignoring the 5th and 6th). UW Dawgs (talk) 05:46, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:D lists other tools besides just the 90 days of recent traffic hits on Wikipedia articles. And as I mentioned, Google web searches, Google Books searches, etc. seem to indicate a more long-term usage and significance meaning to the surgery procedure -- and it takes a while before you actually find something related to the album. And the problem I have is that we don't have data yet for what has been going on for the past few years regarding traffic to these Wikipedia articles. So what if I drop those stats to ~15% of current levels? -- it is still based on data from the past few months. Even if it were true that there is some more usage towards this pop culture topic (a music album), unless there is more evidence that this usage towards it is more ever-lasting, I do not think that should outweigh the more long-term meaning and significance of the surgery procedure. As WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says, if there is some conflict between a topic of primary usage (such as Apple, Inc) and one of primary long-term significance (such as Apple, the fruit), consensus determines which article, if any, is the primary topic. So I still vote for the status quo: long-term significance towards the surgery procedure. In other words: if I had to choose between the short-term, 90-day systemic bias behavior of the average Wikipedia user who is more generally interested in pop culture/music/TV topics, versus the overall behavior of the average worldwide Internet user represented more by Google results, I'm going to error on the side of the latter and credibility every time. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * - on page views, I would not count the articles where "face lift" is not the main subject. For example, the CSI show, where Face Lift is just one of the many episodes of one season. Alternatively I would at least divide by 23 because there were 23 episodes. For the album called third, again, Facelift is one of five different songs considering the existence of Esther's Nose Job, so I would either divide the views by 5 or discount all the views altogether. starship.paint ~  KO   02:16, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed, it's simply listing the existing DAB articles. Facelift (automotive) and/or Facelift (album) alone are sufficient to support a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC dispute. Especially as seen by the numerous automotive articles which are linking to the redirect and landing on Rhytidectomy. Hence the need to move the DAB location. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:44, 24 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Support at least two topics with long-term significance here, Rhytidectomy and Facelift (automotive), and no primary topic. Peter James (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I cannot support this argument. When I do the same Google web searches, Google Books searches, etc., there seems to be still overwhelming results to the surgery procedure than the auto practise -- again suggesting that there is both more long-term usage and significance meaning toward the former among the general worldwide Internet public. I do not think it helps the "long-term" case when Facelift (automotive) remains a stub with only four citations. And again, you cannot just merely look at "Whatlinkshere" in a bubble because (as I was alluding to in my previous comment), it may fall into the systemic bias behavior of the average Wikipedia user, who is more interested in writing more articles on automobile-related topics than surgical procedures. Of course, Special:WhatLinksHere/Facelift_(automotive) is getting skewed higher when more Wikipedia editors are going to create more auto-related articles (especially a page for every single car model) to link to. Zzyzx11 (talk) 13:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - As Peter James says, we have two topics of long-term significance, namely the automotive practise and the surgical procedure. Neither is a clear primary topic over the other. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 10:43, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment "we have two topics of long-term significance, namely the automotive practise and the surgical procedure." Maybe I'm dense, but I'm not seeing the aim of the move. The dab, as it stands, covers the "sub-uses", & the above quote covers the two major sub-uses; the automotive IMO is only true in light of the surgical, so the primary remains surgical. Losing the other minor uses would be a bad idea. (Giving prominence to an album I've never heard of would be a worse one, IMO.)  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  17:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose; there's a clear primary topic. What would your typical user of WP expect when they type in facelift? Red Slash 04:06, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * In your hypothetical, 25% of users may be expecting Rhytidectomy, while 75% of users clearly are NOT expecting the current behavior based on usage stats. That's not a 'clear' WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. UW Dawgs (talk) 18:42, 25 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose. There clearly is a primary topic. Suggesting the automotive usage or the album are anywhere near as common is frankly laughable. What do most people think of a when they hear the term? An album by a relatively obscure band? A car appearance change? I really don't think so. Ridiculous. Let's use a bit of common sense. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:52, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * And yet 75% of our 'Facelift' traffic is not interested in Rhytidectomy. Hence there is no clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. UW Dawgs (talk) 16:49, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll repeat, common sense! Remember, there are lies, damned lies and statistics! -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:41, 30 July 2015 (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.