Talk:Kill This Love

Why are there 2 articles?
The EP arguably isn't independently notable outside of the song of the same name. Shouldn't they be merged? There also seem to be the same questions about the video clip's popularity on YouTube on this article as there are on the song's article. It probably belongs on the song's article but not on the EP's. 58.179.159.63 (talk) 21:15, 7 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Never mind, I figured it out. For some reason in some places the EP is listed as a single while in other places it is listed as an album. How about, to avoid confusion, this one is listed as Kill This Love (EP) and the other one as Kill This Love (single). 58.179.159.63 (talk) 06:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 30 November 2021

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. — Coffee  //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 12:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Kill This Love → Kill This Love (EP) – EP seems just a notable as the single, if not slightly less; |Kill_This_Love_(song) see here. If moved, the former namespace of the EP article could be converted to a disambiguation page for the song and EP. Waddles 🗩 🖉 16:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 04:34, 12 December 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. Colonestarrice (talk) 12:06, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

17:55, 18 June 2020‎ HDORS talk contribs block‎ 75 bytes +75‎  LDMGS moved page Kill This Love (EP) to Kill This Love over redirect as a previous move with no rationale. Andrewa (talk) 17:41, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose because a hatnote is adequate and would reduce the total number of clicks readers have to got through (with a disambiguation page, both readers looking for the EP and those looking for the single will have to click once). The EP moreover serves well as a WP:CONCEPTDAB as the only other topic with the same name is a song mentioned as part of the EP. feminist (talk) 04:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I am definitely sympathetic to the arguments made by feminist, but it's worth pointing out the very similar case of Baby One More Time, which is a dab because the album and its title song have roughly similar pageviews (decided via a somewhat sparsely attended 2015 RM at Talk:Baby One More Time, but affirmed by the results of a more comprehensive discussion at Talk:...Baby_One_More_Time_(album)). So, if nothing else, I'd lean towards supporting the proposed move for consistency with BOMT. Another similar case, linked to in the aforementioned RM, is The Man Who Sold the World (RM). Colin M (talk) 23:17, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The song gets slightly more views (2,674) than the EP (2,271) but the name of the song is based on the EP so it could be argued its a broad-concept article.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 17:12, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Unsure. Can argue this a number of ways and not convinced it matters which way we go. Either the song or EP could go to the base name or be the destination of it if redirected. But certainly no DAB is required. I also note

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.