User:Mellohi!/Requested moves essays

This page will contain essays reflecting upon my time on my time in the requested moved process.

"Other stuff exists" isn't a valid argument in requested moves either
"Other stuff exists" is an argument to avoid not only in deletion discussions, but also in requested move discussions. In RMs, this line of thinking is often used in two ways, either to support a consistency argument or to dismiss a primary topic.

When used to dismiss a primary topic, an "other stuff exists" voter might cite other pages with similar names existing. But to be best taken seriously, such voters should be able to argue how the other stuff prevents the apparent primary topic from being primary.

Primary topics do not need their own articles
In most cases, it is not necessary for a primary topic to have an independent article. The primary topic could be discussed in a section of a different article. For instance, a murder victim may be discussed in an article about their death, and it is generally okay Not having an independent article does not disqualify a topic from being the primary topic.

Long-term significance is not an excuse for "other stuff exists"
People may oppose calling something a primary topic by claiming that something else is the primary topic based on long-term significance. This is a perfectly valid concern. But far too many times they turn into WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS arguments, without actually finding a primary topic of longest-term significance. A long-term significance counterargument is useless if it cannot find a primary topic!

Widely accepted small details
There are several small details that have been found to time and time again be sufficient at distinguishing two similarly named things. Opposers to these tend to fall into "I don't like it!"; closers should ignore such opposition.


 * Accepted explicitly in WP:SMALLDETAILS:
 * Sentence case vs. title case (e.g. Ice cube vs. Ice Cube)
 * General practice
 * Definite articles