Talk:Red Snow

Proposed move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved) Mike Cline (talk) 12:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Red Snow → Red Snow (weapon) – So that the disambiguation page "Red Snow (disambiguation)" can take its place per Disambiguation. The weapon is not a primary topic. --Bensin (talk) 14:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Support. The doctrine of "primary topic" is applied too zealously in our titling decisions. In the present case it is entirely unhelpful. N oetica Tea? 00:31, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose unless there is some indication for the change of primary topic. (Applying guidelines one editor disagrees with should not be cast as zealotry.) -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Some statistics:
 * Red Snow (the weapon): viewed 1,892 times in 201203
 * Watermelon snow (linked from the disambig page): viewed 3,228 times in 201203
 * 30 Days of Night: Red Snow: viewed 675 times in 201203
 * redsn0w: viewed 20,376 times in 201203
 * --Bensin (talk) 05:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Good! Here are points to note, in taking account of those statistics:
 * There is zero reason to assume most of the views at Red snow were from readers interested in the weapon. After all, the title gives no indication.
 * Watermelon snow (probably often sought under the name "red snow") receives many more views than Red snow (the article about the weapon).
 * Redsn0w (probably often sought under the name "red snow") receives vastly more views than Red snow (the article about the weapon).
 * The pageview evidence gives no indication that subject of the weapon article qualifies as a "primary topic". It gives strong evidence against that.
 * N oetica Tea? 01:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I think this conflates "red snow" and "Red Snow", and consequently page views for Red snow and Red Snow, the former not yet having been quantified here. ENeville (talk) 18:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose – The only other article ambiguous with "Red Snow" (in Title Caps) is:
 * Red Snow (The Twilight Zone): viewed 560 times in 201203
 * Even if all those page views are subtracted from Red Snow (the weapon) as click-throughs in search of the television episode, typed in with the Title Caps, the weapon article still has many more page views. I would observe that red snow redirects to Red Snow (disambiguation), which seems to obviate arguments based on alternative capitalizations, since lower case would be the default used in searches absent a more particular topic sought.


 * Given the various capitalizations of red snow that are listed, including for "red snow", I would think that the dab page should be moved to red snow. ENeville (talk) 21:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Does that mean that you prefer the proposed arrangement to the existing arrangement, ENeville? Do we agree on this: we should not assume that the typical reader – with sketchy information, looking for the certainty that an encyclopedia can provide – is somehow magically prepared already with information about capitalisation in the target title. N oetica Tea? 01:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure exactly what question is posed, but I offer this: the average person searching on Wikipedia will enter "red snow", and get redirected from red snow to a dab page at Red Snow (disambiguation). I think the dab page should reside instead at red snow.  I also think that someone who takes the trouble to enter "Red Snow" is looking for a proper noun, consistent with naming policy at WP:TITLEFORMAT. Given that only two article titles are ambiguous in the "Red Snow" namespace, and the article on the weapon is viewed at least twice as often (even accounting for click-throughs) then it is primary per WP:PRIMARY and should stay at Red Snow. ENeville (talk) 18:15, 12 April 2012 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.