Talk:Paint It, Black

Speedy deletion
Radiopathy, I'm not sure why you don't believe people will come to Wikipedia and search for "Paint It Black", especially as that is how it is quite often referred to. It makes perfect sense to have a redirect from this page to the correctly punctuated article at Paint It, Black. --JD554 (talk) 16:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paint_It_Black_(disambiguation)  R ad io pa th y  •talk•   16:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The Rollings Stones song is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC with 542,000 ghits compared to 241,000 for the punk band, 18,300 for Eric Burdon & War's version and 16,900 for the book. And Paint It, Black has a relevant hatnote to redirect to the dab page. --JD554 (talk) 16:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * CSD G8 is for pages dependent on a non-existent page, it clearly does not apply in this case, even by the most nit-picky reading of the criteria. (The closest possible one would be R3, but that one won't fly either). G8 has already been declined by users not involved in the current edit war. Please cool down and take this to RfD. Hairhorn (talk) 17:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Here's the Consensus:
An admin who was involved in this suggested that I redirect to the disambig page. Your disruptive edit has been reverted as vandalism. Have a nice day!  R ad io pa th y  •talk•  17:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That wasn't consensus it was a suggested possible course of action. Now I've clearly explained the reason why this page should redirect to Paint It, Black, ie WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The Paint It, Black page then has a hatnote to direct users to Paint It Black (disambiguation) should they need to be. The majority of readers will be looking for The Rolling Stones song article. --JD554 (talk) 17:23, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was merely pointing to what you appeared to wish to want to do, rather than going via CSD. Discussion about the target of a redirect should be on the redirect's talk page i.e. here. Also, changing the redirect in either direction in this case is not vandalism, but be carefull of WP:3RR!. You could also post a message on Talk:Paint It, Black or indeed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect to garner more opinions. Fribbler (talk) 17:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

It should point to the disambig page, otherwise it fails WP:UNDUE.  R ad io pa th y  •talk•  16:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nearly all the incoming links are for the Rolling Stones song. Until they are updated, and consensus is gained to redirect to the disambig, this page shall point to Paint It, Black which has an appropriate hatnote. –xenotalk 17:51, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Except it doesn't fail that because it is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. We should be trying to help readers of the encyclopaedia to find what they are actually looking for. The majority of readers who will be using the search term "Paint It Black" will be looking for The Rolling Stones' song. This can be shown by the where the incoming links to the different Paint It Black articles come from and by the number ghits the various items get. So we direct readers to Paint It, Black which has a hatnote for the minority of readers who want one of the other articles to the disambiguation page. This is all backed up by WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --JD554 (talk) 19:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that it should redirect to Paint It, Black rather than the disambig page. First, there's apparently a primary topic for the term, so that's all that's really needed to establish what to do here. But also, it's confusing to have two pages that differ only by punctuation go two different places. That requires readers to know the correct form of the article they want when searching. We really should be trying to make it easy to find what one probably wants and easy to find what one really wants if first search result is not correct, but also aim for least surprise when searching trivially/subtly-different search terms. DMacks (talk) 05:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with the above, the Stones song is the primary topic, so the redirect should point there. Dayewalker (talk) 17:30, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also agree with the above. The song is clearly the primary topic here.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  05:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)