Talk:Woman in the Dunes

wiki search
something really needs to be done about the wiki search. i entered "woman in the dunes" into the search tool. i got no results. because i used lowercase letters. but not only did the "GO" button NOT direct me to the article, the SEARCH TOOL doesn't even come up with any hits or results. this is disgraceful. the wiki search is terrible. i've had other similar experiences: sometimes i can't even find a wiki that I'VE ALREADY READ BEFORE because i'm using a slightly slightly wrong title. for example, if you insert a middle name into a subjects first/last name, the search tool won't find it. it's really shameful, for an online encyclopedia.


 * Due to the rapidly increasing levels of traffic that Wikipedia attracts, it is sometimes necessary to disable the search tool in order to improve performance. As Wikimedia purchases more computer hardware, this should becoma less of a problem in the near future. Rje 15:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Book or Movie
I think the synopsis needs to clarify if it is speaking of the book or movie, because there are plot differences to the two stories. I don't have a clear memory of the story to say with confidence that they entry is correct for both of them.


 * The synopsis refers to the movie only, I wrote the section and have not read the book. We should include a further section detailing differences between the two, although obviously I am unable to dothis myself. I changed the section title to make it clear that the synopsis is of the film. Rje 15:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I have read the novel, what can I do? 124.9.0.3 (talk) 14:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The novel is separately notable, and requires its own article, with information on the Japanese edition and any and all English translations.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:49, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Summary Inaccurate
"At the end of the film Junpei gets his chance to escape, but he chooses to prolong his stay in the dune, in part because the woman is already pregnant with his child." That last clause isn't stated in the film; it's the article's inference, at best. The film makes the decision to stay seem absurd, as if Junpei has come to prefer his life in the pit. Perhaps the novel makes the point about the child, but if so, then the film chooses to omit it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.66.85.99 (talk) 13:55, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I concur. In the film, one of the village people says that female has an ectopic pregnancy--if this is so, then the fetus would die and, given the poor conditions of the village and the late detection of the problem, it's possible the female's life is at risk as well. As a scientist, Junpei would know this, so his decision to stay in the dune is probably not based on a belief that he's going to be raising a child. I went ahead and deleted the inaccuracy from the entry.

Requested move 16 December 2015

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: MOVING  TheJack15 (talk) 10:58, 29 December 2015 (UTC) Was already MOVED according to the initial proposal implemented by based on the improper closure by  who was subject to WP:MR and foudn to be a WP:SOCK. As a result, I have stricked his close, and reclosing to tidy up the mess they created. However I believe the accurate consensus is to remove the DAB pages, the parenthetical DABS, and let SMALLDETAILS and TWODABS/HATNOTES prevail. I am pinging to evaluate and process that move since it requires G6 deletions. (non-admin closure)

The Woman in the Dunes (film) → Woman in the Dunes (film) – The Woman in the Dunes is the book. Woman in the Dunes is the film. Similar so still needs "(film)".  Film Fan  22:36, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. In which case, The Woman in the Dunes (novel) should be moved to The Woman in the Dunes, which is now a disambiguation page. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:54, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Support, but don't remove (novel) from the novel (砂の女 Suna no Onna, "Sand woman") various English renderings. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:29, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * In ictu oculi—That doesn't make any sense:
 * Wikipedia never disambiguates when there is no other existing page with the same title—after this article is retitled, there will be no other article title "The Woman in the Dunes"
 * The novel has never been translated as "Sand Woman", "Woman of Sand", or anything other than "The Woman of the Dunes".
 * Even if there were multiple titles for the translation, that would never be an argument for disambiguation (see point #1).
 * Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:39, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes Wikipedia does, all the time. See Hurricane. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:04, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * In ictu oculi: ??? Uh ... what on earth was that supposed to have demonstrated? Are you following the conversation at all? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 11:43, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT + My longer point is that when "The" is not used or not used consistently for (the) Woman in the Dunes (film/novel) there's no benefit to readers is removing (novel). In ictu oculi (talk) 12:07, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I misread the request as a move to an undisambiguated title. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * And WP:SMALLDETAILS also applies.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 14:28, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No, that applies explicitly to titles that are "typographically near-identical". Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Support and the novel per In ictu oculi.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 13:32, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Move to Woman in the Dunes, and move the novel to The Woman in the Dunes. In the spirit of WP:TWODABS, these two articles have related but distinct titles, meaning a dab page is unnecessary. Disambiguation can be better handled with hat notes than by sending all readers searching for either title to a dead end.--Cúchullain t/ c 17:11, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Support the proposed small details presented by Cuchullain 75.140.118.112 (talk) 06:32, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: @, the consensus is for the move. If the other suggestion is supported that can be discussed in a new RM.  Film Fan  17:58, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Move the film article to Woman in the Dunes and the novel article to The Woman in the Dunes, per Cúchullain. There's no point in having two move requests (and two moves). Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 09:03, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Support the proposed small details presented by Cuchullain even though my nomination is different because I don't really care either way.  Film Fan  00:37, 27 December 2015 (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.

Requested move 5 January 2016

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved. There is a consensus that, in this case, the "small detail" of "The" is sufficient to disambiguate these two articles from each other. There is also a consensus that the novel is the primary topic ahead of the newly created album article. Jenks24 (talk) 08:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

– Per the original nom's ('s) request above, and to confirm consensus this is a new RM to discuss removing the disambiguation pages, in the spirit of WP:TWODABS and WP:SMALLDETAILS. Note the prior RM was regarding removing "The" from this page which, closed with consensus, however the non-admin closure was performed by a confirmed sock,. I sent a ping to the admin who performed the G6 move for the sock, however didn't receive a reply so I'm opening this new discussion after about a week. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:03, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Woman in the Dunes (film) → Woman in the Dunes
 * The Woman in the Dunes (novel) → The Woman in the Dunes
 * Pinging those involved in the initial move discussion:, , , , ,.
 * Support. As I said above, these subjects have related but distinct titles: the film is Woman in the Dunes and the book is The Woman in the Dunes. Hat notes will take care of any confusion in one less click than sending all readers of both articles to the dab page.--Cúchullain t/ c 18:05, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose completely daft. The presence or absence of "the" is all over the place for both (film) and (novel) in GBooks, and this is really user-unfriendly. To use en.wp you have to guess whether "the" is present or not in a translated Japanese title? In ictu oculi (talk) 18:48, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * That's right, as we do all over Wikipedia. The worst thing that happens is users have to click through the hatnote to the other article—which they would have to do if forced to a dab page anyways, so we're saving half the users the effort, instead of forcing it on all of them.  The disambiguated pages remain as redirects that still appear as search box suggestions (as with The End of the Road (novel), which shows up as a search box suggestion and redirects to The End of the Road). Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Not as far as I'm aware, can you show me another pair of articles where the presence or absence of "the" isn't consistent in English sources that we don't have (film) and (novel) on as we have here? And I'm sorry you seem to be mistaken The End of the Road (novel) redirect does not show up when [The End of the Roa...] is inputted, at least not on Chrome and Firefox and Explorer on PC, try it. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:24, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not nearly as "inconsistent" as you're claiming. The "the" is rare for the film and almost always used for the novel.--Cúchullain t/ c 17:31, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * redirect does not show—it shows up for me. I don't know why it wouldn't show up for you, but I'm sure there's nothing magical about my computer.  As for other examples, there's The End of Time and End of Time, which took me all of five seconds to find by typing in "The ..." randomly.   Equally quickly I found Mother of Kings and The Mother of Kings, and Animal and The Animal. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:44, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Your personal preference (and that's all it is - there is no policy basis for your position), User:In ictu oculi, is contrary to community consensus. --В²C ☎ 00:54, 23 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Support per the previous RfC. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * oppose Someone has expanded the dpage, so the dab page has more than two entries, thus isn't a 2DAB any longer. There's no value in adding extensive hatnotes to both articles by merging the dab page onto two articles. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:14, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * See WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. All the entries in the "Music" section fail it miserably. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 07:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom, IIO, CT, et al. It might be a moot point, but the book I have at home is "...in the..." and the BFI DVD edition I have is "...of the..." Anyway, back to collecting insects.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:23, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Lugnuts er actually I opposed :) In ictu oculi (talk) 17:24, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Rats' cocks! I meant Cúchullain.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 18:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * UK title is Woman of the Dunes.  Film Fan  11:33, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Support per nom.  Film Fan  12:56, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:SMALLDETAILS and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Also, there was already a consistent consensus above for this move, in spite of the sock's close.  Cavarrone  08:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support as per prior consensus and SMALLDETAILS. With regard to the new DAB entry for The Woman in the Dunes (Steven Severin album) it still appears that The Woman in the Dunes (novel) is still WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and a hatnote would be sufficient. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * FWIW when I posted this RM is was as an uninvolved, unbiased editor simply doing administrative cleanup after a confirmed sock. I was waiting until now to voice my comments, to avoid any appearance of a SUPERVOTE. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:12, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support Yes, of course. Per WP:SMALLDETAILS and each is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:COMMONNAME of its respective proposed title, fully meeting WP:CRITERIA.  Two articles.  Two unique titles.  And some outliers still think disambiguation is necessary.  Head scratcher. --В²C ☎ 22:28, 22 January 2016 (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.

Plot edits
Regarding your recent cleanup edit, I agree with most of your changes except I'm not so sure about the plot changes. Specifically the removal of the lines "and to have a child with her" and "He requests time to watch the nearby sea, and the villagers offer to grant it if he makes love to the woman while they watch, but she fends him off." Now for the former that's probably just my personal interpretation and redundant to him becoming her husband, but the latter was one of the most intense scenes in the film and important to the plot as a whole which deals with his struggle for freedom and his relation to the women. It shows how he has changed from someone completely rebellious against the villagers to becoming at their mercy, desperate for any respite, even dehumanizing him and her both in the process. Opencooper (talk) 12:31, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Tottori Sankyu Sand Dune, Japan.jpg