Talk:Thank You for Your Service (book)

Requested move 22 April 2022

 * 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: moved - items 2 & 3, not moved - 1. 3 replies are in favor of moving the base name to a dab title with (book), and then moving the existing dab page to the base name, and the same 3 are opposed to the film occupying the primary topic (assuming Cerebral726 supports this and does not actually contradictorily support and oppose Roman Spinner's proposal as I read it the first time :P ) (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE  19:12, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

– Clear primary target according to |Thank_You_for_Your_Service_(2015_film)|Thank_You_for_Your_Service_(2017_film) page views. The film is newer than the book on which it is based, but the number of views is so much higher this should be non-controversial. See Thank You for Your Service (disambiguation) for other related titles. MB 00:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Steel1943  (talk) 20:22, 5 May 2022 (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.
 * Thank You for Your Service → Thank You for Your Service (book)
 * Thank You for Your Service (2017 film) → Thank You for Your Service
 * Oppose Thank You for Your Service (2017 film) → Thank You for Your Service and support Thank You for Your Service → Thank You for Your Service (book) as well as Thank You for Your Service (disambiguation) → Thank You for Your Service. There are four entries listed upon the Thank You for Your Service (disambiguation) page, with no indication that the renown of either the film or the book is at such a high level that it dwarfs the combined notability of the other three entries. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose and support Roman Spinner's suggestion. Seems like the correct move given the relative notability. --Cerebral726 (talk) 17:59, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose 2nd, but support Roman Spinner's suggestion (i.e. support 1st move but oppose 2nd move, and then move the disambiguation page to the basename), per reasons described by Roman Spinner. Paintspot Infez (talk) 23:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)