Talk:Pather Panchali (novel)

Requested move 18 July 2020

 * 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: not moved.  Calidum   19:20, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

– The film is based on the novel which has the first priority. ~Moheen (keep talking) 17:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Pather Panchali (novel) → Pather Panchali
 * Pather Panchali → Pather Panchali (film)


 * Oppose - its not automatic that the original source is primary. Google Ngrams doesn't show an impact around the time of the 1929 book, but does show a rise since the time of the 1955 film, and the film article is consistently getting the most views. -- Netoholic @ 20:30, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment, I'm unclear on your position. Is it that, since the novel (1929) is the basis of the film (1955), the novel should automatically be the primary topic? Zaathras (talk) 21:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Netoholic. When same-titled books and films have separate Wikipedia entries, each case is judged on its own merits. Some books {War and Peace, Les Misérables, The Scarlet Letter} are WP:PRIMARYTOPICS over the film versions. Other book titles {Gone with the Wind (novel)} are set on an equal footing with the film version {Gone with the Wind (film)} while still others {Forrest Gump (novel)} are overtaken by the film version {Forrest Gump}. Pather Panchali (novel) is one of the latter. It was not translated into English until 1968, thirteen years after the film achieved international recognition. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:31, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose, the film is one of the most critically acclaimed in the world and is primary over a little-known book. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:04, 19 July 2020 (UTC)