Talk:Virgin Snow (album)

Requested move 4 April 2019

 * 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 section. 

The result of the move request was: moved as proposed. Consensus for the second move exists when considering the strength of arguments. feminist (talk) 13:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

– Only two articles with this title, and the Korean-Japanese film from 2007 receives |Virgin_Snow_(film) 97% of all page views. PC78 (talk) 10:19, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Virgin Snow → Virgin Snow (album)
 * Virgin Snow (film) → Virgin Snow
 * Support first, not convinced about the benefit to readers of removing (film) from a Korean film, vs virgin snow. cf Virgin Group's 1980s travel venture. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:24, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Support - as WP:ONEOTHER with hatnote directing to the album from the film. Would also be just as fine with disambiguating both for a while per WP:NOPRIMARY. I think the main (non-title) use of this phrase is as the skiing term "virgin snow" (aka "virgin powder"). -- Netoholic @  13:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced ONEOTHER applies even though there are only 2 articles. Virgin Snow (disambiguation) In ictu oculi (talk) 13:37, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Why do you think it might not apply, can you elaborate? The redirect virgin snow has just been created and is not mentioned at the target article, per WP:DIFFCAPS I'm not convinced that it needs to be factored in. Other dab page entries (again, this page just created) don't appear to have much significance. PC78 (talk) 12:34, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Support 1st, oppose 2nd per In ictu oculi - no clear primary topic. Move disambiguation page to the basename of "Virgin Snow". Paintspot Infez (talk) 15:08, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom, with hatnote to the album. 97% of page views, per the nom, seems to cinch primary. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Support both. If 97% of page views is not a clear primary topic, what is? If anyone thinks arranging titles per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC does not benefit readers, that's an argument to make at WT:D.  Good luck with that. --В²C ☎ 19:44, 5 April 2019 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.