Talk:Pardesi (1957 film)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Journey Beyond Three Seas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061017195252/http://www.aksharamala.com/hindi/isb/search/?f=Pardesi to http://www.aksharamala.com/hindi/isb/search/?f=Pardesi

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 17 May 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: It's time to close this one way or another. I do not think that SMALLDETAILS arguments hold water, since real world does not consistently differentiate the film and the book like this. It seems that the general preference is for Pardesi (1957 film), explicit or tacit, so there it goes. No such user (talk) 11:52, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Journey Beyond Three Seas → Journey Beyond Three Seas (film) – Not PT. That would be A Journey Beyond the Three Seas. WP:SMALLDETAILS does not apply here, since the (in)definite articles are not distinguishing features. Both are titles of works and both are translations from a language without articles. Srnec (talk) 01:10, 17 May 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. ~  (t, e &#124; c, l) 13:54, 27 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose - With only two items, there isn't enough to create a disambiguation page at primary, and I doubt it makes sense to redirect the "Journey..." to "A Journey...", so what this move accomplishes is only lengthening the title of one article. Being that there are only two articles (that should have WP:HATNOTEs to each other), disambiguate neither. If later a disambiguation page should be created in the future, then we'd probably disambiguate both the film and the literary work. -- Netoholic @ 03:38, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no difference between "A Journey..." and "Journey..." in this case. The current setup is entirely arbitrary. Srnec (talk) 04:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that both the film and the literary work sometimes go by "A Journey" and "Journey"? -- Netoholic @ 04:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for the film, but for the literary work the answer is yes. There is no article (definite or indefinite) in the Russian, so no difference between "[A/The] Journey Beyond [the] Three Seas". All are used for Nikitin's work and it is the primary meaning of all of them. For all I know, Pardesi (1957 film) is the best title for this article. But the current setup is certainly bad. Srnec (talk) 22:11, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Move. The current setup is extremely confusing. Ghirla-трёп- 10:17, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Support the traveller's account is the more likely. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:08, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. As long as one article is titled A Journey... on WP and the only other one is titled Journey... on WP, WP:SMALLDETAILS does apply. So long as hatnotes are properly on each article to avoid confusion, there's no benefit to moving just one article. Station1 (talk) 00:16, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You are wrong. SMALLDETAILS applies only when the detail makes a difference off WP. We do not get to invent distinctions, which is exactly what we are doing. Srnec (talk) 01:13, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * We do not get to invent distinctions, but if that's what's been done, this proposal does absolutely nothing to change that. One article would still be titled "A Journey..." and the other "Journey..." even after the move. The only difference would be the addition of an unnecessary qualifier to one but not the other. If the proposal was to add an "A" to this title or remove the "A" from the other title, this would be a different discussion. Station1 (talk) 06:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The proposal adds a necessary qualifier. The current title should redirect to the PT, the written work. The title is a translation from Russian, which has no a or the, so translations can and do vary. All of the following are used in English for the written work:
 * Journey Beyond Three Seas
 * Journey Beyond the Three Seas
 * A Journey Beyond Three Seas
 * A Journey Beyond the Three Seas
 * The Journey Beyond the Three Seas
 * The Journey Beyond Three Seas
 * In short, it doesn't really matter where you put a or the. There might be one right way for the film, but that is irrelevant. They are all OK for Nikitin's work and it is PT for all of them. Srnec (talk) 18:47, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The film get double the pageviews of the written work, so the written work is not the obvious primary topic. I think the easiest and best solution is to move the film back to its original title, before it was moved in 2009, Pardesi (1957 film). I see no ref or external link that calls it Journey Beyond Three Seas except the NY Times. Everyone else seems to call it Pardesi. Just keep a hatnote on the other article. Station1 (talk) 07:05, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I would support a move to Pardesi (1957 film). Srnec (talk) 23:54, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

How do you feel about moving the film article to Pardesi (1957 film) as proposed above? Lennart97 (talk) 14:18, 3 June 2021 (UTC) 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.