Talk:Beating Heart (Ellie Goulding song)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 22 July 2017[edit]

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: not moved - the arguments put forward by both sides are compelling but they seem to lead to a clash of guidelines (WP:PTOPIC and WP:SONGDAB). I suggest maintaining the status quo for now until the guidelines are altered by consensus so that a move has a clearer rationale. DrStrauss talk 10:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beating Heart (Ellie Goulding song) → Beating Heart (song) – Only one song with an article called "Beating Heart". 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:818D:A6DB:D4B4:E7ED (talk) 11:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. -- Dane ^talk 20:53, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). TonyBallioni (talk) 20:18, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Not the case Beating Heart (Gyllene Tider song) also has an article, under original title. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:29, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@In ictu oculi and 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:818D:A6DB:D4B4:E7ED:: contested move have been procedurally converted to an RM. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:18, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per In ictu oculi and the concurrently ongoing WP:RM regarding Beating Heart (Gyllene Tider song) at Talk:När vi två blir en#Requested move 23 July 2017. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 07:44, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is the only article on a song titled "Beating Heart", so the move is appropriate per WP:SONGDAB's recommendations to exclude the artist's name. It does not appear that "När vi två blir en" is widely known as "Beating Heart" - according to the article, that was the title of a limited release English version that has no article of its own.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:09, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is another case that makes me question our concept of primary topic as it stands. Beating heart (song) isn't a particularly likely search term for either song, as the phrase is a Wikipedia invention. Andrewa (talk) 05:42, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC issue, as this song isn't being claimed as the primary topic of the undisambiguated term "Beating Heart". It's a disambiguation issue, and without any other song articles of this title, WP:SONGDAB is pretty clear.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:25, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agree it's not explicitly a PT issue but the same principles apply IMO. Andrewa (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, but there's also the principle that we follow the relevant guidelines and consensus behind them barring some good reason not to. The language at WP:SONGDAB was added following a comprehensive RFC to that effect.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:21, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That RfC was strangely phrased and seems inconclusive to me. All that was decided was that the shorter disambiguator should apply to most usual cases, and there was dissent even from that. Andrewa (talk) 01:25, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what to tell you. The RFC seems pretty clearly phrased and there was clear consensus for it. It has been added to the guideline and widely adopted; at this point probably hundreds of articles have been moved in accordance with the guideline.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:37, 3 August 2017 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.