Talk:Tical (unit)

Requested move 8 September 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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 15:24, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Tical → Tical (unit) – Given the minimal number of |Tical_(album) pageviews this article gets, compared to the 1994 Method Man album, it cannot be considered primary. Per WP:NOPRIMARY, Tical should be a disambiguation page. 162 etc. (talk) 03:44, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: If moved, please let it be done by an admin who can do a history split and move only the versions since August 2021, restoring the disambiguation page before that. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:04, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Anthony Appleyard has done a history split, so the closer should now be able to perform the move the regular way. The disambiguation page now at Tical (disambiguation) should also be moved to Tical if the discussion is closed as move. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: This page was converted to an article just a month ago, so page views beyond that wouldn't tell much (though views during the past month still shows significant difference). Not sure if this counts as WP:RECENTISM, as the album was released over twenty years ago, but practically all Google Books search results are about the unit of weight/currency. Both the Thai baht and Cambodian tical are derived from the unit, so the article serves as a WP:CONCEPTDAB for both of them, but not the album. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:04, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Right, my interpretation is that Tical (unit) wins on long-term notability, and Tical (album) wins on pageviews; hence neither is primary. 162 etc. (talk) 14:36, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, support. I've given this some thought and the line of reasoning makes sense. I wouldn't mind if this is closed early as unnecessary; if so I'll ask Anthony Appleyard directly to do the split. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:27, 9 September 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.
 * Weak support the unit is probably primary by long-term significance but not by usage, 476,166 views for the album v 23,456 for the unit so a DAB is probably the best compromise.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 07:43, 13 September 2021 (UTC)