Talk:Tjejer (album)

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 31 May 2019[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move, after extended time for discussion. bd2412 T 19:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tjejer (Arvingarna album) → Tjejer – Clear primary topic, as no other articles share the name. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:36, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fyrael: Tjejer is a disambig page. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:36, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support. Considering the only other dab page entries are a partial title match and a Swedish slang word that has no article (should this even be listed?) this seems fair enough, but we're talking about a bare-bones article that gets an average of less than one page view per day. PC78 (talk) 01:15, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the other two entries on the page should be there. -- Fyrael (talk) 04:13, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, but I'm also not convinced that this article shouldn't just be redirected to the band. PC78 (talk) 11:14, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And simply delete the current DAB page? -- Fyrael (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the above comments relate to the incomplete DAB as was, not as is. Though would also redirect this album to the band. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:06, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose not the only subject, 2 albums, 2 songs. Fails Primary Topic. And are we sure a stub on a 9-charting Swedish album is notable? @Fyrael: why haven't you uploaded the album cover? Surely the cover will help more readers find it than deleting the artist name and album? In ictu oculi (talk) 17:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why would I be uploading anything? What in the world deletions are you talking about? I've never edited this album's article and know nothing about it. What 2 albums and 2 songs are you talking about? There are 6 hits plus the DAB for pages with "Tjejer" in the title and none of them would even be appropriate for the DAB page except for this album, so how is it not the only subject? -- Fyrael (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I now see the other entries you've added, but I still didn't delete any artist names or albums. And if you believe that some of these other entries are worthy of an article, should I be expecting to see those soon? -- Fyrael (talk) 04:54, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But this technical request was remove the artist name and (album) from the title. I don't believe that those other entries are worthy of an article, I don't believe that this entry is worthy of an article. I believe that Tjejer is worthy of a dab page - which we have. As for uploading album covers WP:FILEUPLOADWIZARD. I certainly would be strongly opposed to removing artist name without supplying artwork. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:05, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What does one of these things have to do with the other? If you're so keen for the article to include an album cover, why not seek one out and upload it yourself? This is the "encyclopedia that anyone can edit", after all. PC78 (talk) 11:10, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why should I? I'm not the one trying to ambiguate the album and make it more difficult to identify. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:33, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~^The hypocrisy is astonishing in this one for someone who always want others to assume good faith on them.~~ © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 18:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I presume this edit was meant to be small not strikethrough. But here's the thing the tech move was based on a good faith assumption that the dab page was complete, but of course it wasn't which now renders the move an ambiguation of the album and makes it more difficult to identify. There's no need for personal animus here or "support" votes that ignore the existence of 4 subjects for this word. Is the album a primary topic for the word per both criteria. Evidently not. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:13, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much the same argument is given at Talk:Zhi Hu Zhe Ye or Talk:Lingdian; the only difference is there is a disambiguation page in this case, but it still is the same argument "not being the primary topic of the [non-English] phrase". Well, yes, it is not the primary topic for the Swedish word, but it is the only existing and relevant topic in an English-speaking website (ignore it says "two", but this is covered by WP:TWODABS); even sv:Tjejer (musikalbum) is not located at sv:Tjejer (musikalbum av Arvingarna) despite the other album shares nationality. Neither Tjejer (Drifters album), Tjejer (Kikki Danielsson song) nor Tjejer (Magnus Uggla song) are blue links (as of this comment), so why would they be considered relevant? While "Tjejer (Arvingarna album)" is merely an irrelevant stub that can be merged onto Arvingarna, it was because of users like you that have lowered the bar of notability so much (Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros album), just one quick example that I remember), that you cannot go around asking to merge or delete articles when you constantly contribute to such creations. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 01:31, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since this isn't closed yet, I guess it's not too late to make a comment. First of all, good job to In ictu oculi on both finding the other entries and assuming good faith. I got put off a bit because it seemed like some odd responsibilities were being put on me. The album art bit is still quite confusing because it wouldn't help anyone find the article and the proposal doesn't suggest taking any identifying information out of the article, just out of the title. It's all still right in the first sentence. So while the art I'm sure would be useful, it's no more helpful or necessary after the proposed move than before. But anyway, I think I would probably agree now with the conclusion that there's no clear primary topic. Since it seems like all the entries are pretty obscure, I don't think we can confidently say that one is head-and-shoulders above the rest. -- Fyrael (talk) 16:13, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support, a) this is a Swedish word, not an English one, people who not know the word might be looking its meaning, but it leads to b) this is not a dictionary. Congratulations for having "2 other songs", but this is not Discogs, mere existence is not synonym of relevance. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 18:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. An article which averages less than one view a day is WP:PTOPIC - seriously? Narky Blert (talk) 16:49, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If other topics hadn't been found to compete with it? Yes. There is no absolute floor for page views in determining primary topic. -- Fyrael (talk) 20:26, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a random noise level of views. Narky Blert (talk) 08:14, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.